Title

Solid waste management in Hong Kong

Author(s)

Lai, Wai-hing.;

Citation

Issue Date

2008

URL

http://hdl.handle.net/10722/52459

Rights

The author retains all proprietary rights, (such as patent rights) and the right to use in future works.

Contents
Page List of Abbreviations List of Figures Abstract Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Objectives 1.2 Methodology 1.3 Organization of the Study Literatures Review 2.1 Policy Instruments 2.2 Waste Problem 2.3 Integrated Solid Waste Management 2.4 Private Sector Involvement Background on Hong Kongs Municipal Solid Waste Management Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Management Policy 4.1 Municipal Solid Waste Management Strategy 4.2 Policy on the Use of Plastic Shopping Bags 4.3 Municipal Solid Waste Charging Scheme 4.4 Sorting and Recycling Programmes 4.5 Incentives provided to the Private Sector Recycling Park 4.6 Programmes for Encouraging the Use of Recycled Products 4.7 Education Programmes for Enhancing Public Awareness 4.8 Summary of Policy Instruments Institutional Analysis of Policy Instruments 5.1 Agenda Setting 5.2 Redistribution of Wealth 5.3 Cost-benefit Analysis
i

iii iv vi 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3 Chapter 4

31 38

Chapter 5

73

Chapter 6

Conclusion Appendix I Milestone for Solid Waste Management in Hong Kong Appendix II Hong Kong University Public Opinion Programme Peoples Expectation for the Third Policy Address of Donald Tsang Yam-Kuen References

93 98

106

107

ii

List of Abbreviations
EPD ISWM MEWR Environmental Protection Department, Hong Kong Integrated Solid Waste Management Ministry of the Environmental and Water Resources, Singapore Municipal Solid Waste National Environmental Agency, Singapore Public Waste Collector Department of Environmental Protection, Taipei Department of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, Taipei

MSW NEA PWC TDEP TDBAS

iii

List of Figures
Page 1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 3.1 3.2 3.3 Classification of Solid Waste Policy Instruments and their Major Assumptions Waste Management Hierarchy of Victoria Government, Australia Disposal and Recycling in the Product Life Cycle Solid Waste Disposal in 2001-2006 Hong Kongs Municipal Solid Waste by Waste Types in 2006 Per Capita Disposal Rates of Municipal Solid Waste and Domestic Waste in 2001 - 2006 Facts on Hong Kong, the Taipei city and Singapore Overview of Municipal Solid Waste Management Strategies Process Flow Diagram of an Incineration System Amount of Garbage Clearance and Recycled in Taipei Refuse Disposed of at Authorized Disposal Sites in Singapore (1998 -2007) Domestic Waste Recovery Rate in Hong Kong Recovery of Municipal Solid Waste in Hong Kong (2006) Number of Students Participating in the Student Environmental Protection Ambassador Scheme 2 11 24 27 32 33 34

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5

39 41 43 50 52

4.6 4.7 4.8

54 62 69

iv

4.9 5.1

Policy Instruments in Municipal Solid Waste Management Number of News Clip

70 80

Abstract

This study aims at analyzing various policy instruments in solving the municipal solid waste problem in Hong Kong and the reasons of reluctance by the Hong Kong Government in adopting a more effective instrument. This study will use comparative method, by making reference to the experience of Hong Kong, Taipei and Singapore, to find out which policy instrument is more effective in tackling the waste problem.

Although each policy instrument has its own merits and limitations, mandate will bring an immediate effect in waste reduction although it may face with stiff resistance from various stakeholders. The frameworks of agenda setting, redistribution of wealth and the cost-benefit analysis are used to explain why the Hong Kong Government is reluctant or slow in adopting a mandatory policy (being more effective) to solve the waste problem.

vi

Chapter 1 Introduction

The management of solid waste is a major challenge in urban areas throughout the world, particularly in the rapidly growing cities and towns. Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region of China with limited amount of natural resources and limited space available for waste disposal. The amount of solid waste generated and its disposal has been increasing in recent decades. Being a small and densely populated city with insufficient land for landfill, Hong Kong is faced with serious environmental and administrative challenges in the future with respect to solid waste management. In a society that is producing an ever-increasing amount of solid waste, the identification of appropriate methods of waste management becomes increasingly important.

Solid waste is classified into five main types by making reference to the sources of waste and the institutional arrangements for waste collection and disposal. These main types of solid waste are municipal solid waste (MSW), construction waste, chemical waste, special waste and other solid waste as shown on Figure 1.1. Municipal solid waste further comprises domestic, commercial

and industrial waste. (EPD, 2007d)

In Hong Kong, around half of solid waste disposed of is consisted of MSW. As the majority source of solid waste is MSW, this study will focus on the policies on MSW.

Figure 1.1 - Classification of Solid Waste

(Source: EPD, 2007d)

The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Hong Kong) is situated on the mouth of the Pearl River Delta located at the southeast coast of China. The total area of Hong Kong is about 1 104 sq. km., comprising Hong Kong Island, Kowloon Peninsula and the New Territories. (Hong Kong SAR Government,

2007) According to the latest census, Hong Kong has a population of 6 925 900 in 2007 with an average population density of 6 410 inhabitants per sq. km.. (Census and Statistics Department, 2008)

Rapid economic growth and development has resulted in a large increase in refuse output over recent decades in Hong Kong. In the last decade, the total solid waste produced has increased steadily over the years.

For instance, some 17 000 tonnes of MSW were generated each day in 2006, which are more than 30% when compared with 10 years ago. (Panel on Environmental Affairs, 2008a) The average annual growth rate of MSW is about 3%, much higher than that of 0.9% annual growth rate of population over the past nine years. (Panel on Environmental Affairs, 2008b)

Due to health and environmental considerations, solid waste incineration once in use was closed down in the mid 1980s. Hong Kong currently relies solely on landfilling for the disposal of municipal solid waste. At the time of commissioning the three strategic landfills in Hong Kong, they were expected to be able to meet the waste disposal need until 2020 or beyond.

Since the actual solid waste disposal at the landfills has been much higher than projected and should this trend continue, the three existing landfills
3

will start approach their capacity in the next few years. (EPD, 2005a) Current practice of relying on landfills as the sole mean dealing with the solid waste problem is unsustainable.

With the increasing in the amount of waste produced and the need for waste disposal, the management of solid waste is high on the agenda of the Government. The Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014) (the Policy Framework) was published in December 2005 which set out a comprehensive strategy consisting of a series of tried and proven policy tools and measures to tackle the waste problem ahead. (Environmental

Protection Department, 2005a) The Policy Framework aimed at creating a sustainable system of solving the waste problem.

1.1 Objectives

Policies are made for a variety of reasons. Policy analysis is concerned with predicting cause-and-effect relationships implicit in policies. To solve the waste problem, the Government has formulated a policy framework for municipal solid waste management. Various policy instruments are adopted to make the waste management sustainable.
4

By making reference to the overseas experiences, it is observed that mandate (command and control) is the most effective policy instrument to tackle the waste problem by achieving the desirable targets of waste reduction and recycling. If mandate is the most effective policy instrument, why does the Hong Kong Government not implement such mandatory policies in combating the waste problem? This study aims at finding out the reasons for the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government in adopting mandatory policies in solving the waste problem. Therefore the study aims at addressing the following questions:-

(a) which policy instrument is more effective in solving the waste problem; and (b) why the Hong Kong Government is reluctant or slow in adopting mandatory policies in waste reduction and recycling.

1.2 Methodology

To analyze the Hong Kong municipal solid waste policy, this study will make reference to two overseas experiences in MSW management, namely, the Taipei City and Singapore. These two regions are selected because they have similar geographical and demographical features to Hong Kong and are faced
5

with the same kind of waste problem. Comparing with the experiences in the three places, we will try to find out which policy instrument is more effective in combating the waste problem. Then the paper will analyze why the Hong Kong Government is reluctant or slow in adopting a more effective policy instrument in combating the waste problem.

The data of this study is collected from secondary sources. Secondary sources include statistics and reports on the volume of solid waste, problem of municipal waste management, newspaper cuttings and various websites. The theoretical framework of the study relates to policy instrument and policy analysis.

1.3

Organization of the Study

This paper comprises six chapters. Chapter 1 is the introduction which

outlines the scope and focus on of the study. Chapter 2 reviews the literatures on policy instruments, solid waste problem and management. Chapter 3 will generally describe the municipal solid waste management policies in Hong Kong. Chapter 4 will compare the municipal solid waste management practices in the three places i.e. Hong Kong, the Taipei City and Singapore so as to find out which

policy instrument is more effective in combating the municipal solid waste problem. Chapter 5 will analyze why the Government is reluctant or slow in

adopting mandates (the most effective measure) in combating the waste problem. Chapter 6 will conclude the study.

Chapter 2 Literatures Review

The purpose of the Literatures Review is to provide background information on the topics of policy instruments, solid waste problem and management, which will allow for assessment of the information pertaining to the municipal solid waste management policies in Hong Kong. This information provides a foundation on which a full critical analysis of Hong Kongs municipal solid waste management is conducted. The first part of literature reviews will focus on the literatures on policy instruments. The second part will cover the issues of solid waste problem, integrated solid waste management, and private sector involvement.

2.1

Policy Instruments
The term policy has different interpretations in which it can be

regarded as choice behaviour that whatever governments choose to do or not to do, as decision making process, or as problem solving. Policy is made for a variety of reasons. These reasons include signalling concern about emerging political problems to key constituencies, demonstrating influence by elected officials over

government agencies, causing changes in behaviour of agencies and individuals, and producing socially desirable outcomes. (Howlett and Ramesh, 2003) While there is an argument that policy analysis is not separable from politics (Stone, 1997), policy analysis is concerned with predicting

cause-and-effect relationships implicit in policies. It focuses mainly on the prediction and creation of strong causal links between the instruments that policy makers have available to them and the effects they are trying, or are assumed to be trying to create, and on finding workable solutions. In all its manifestations, policy analysis is instrumental. (Elmore, 1987) Elmore argues that certain types of problems predictably bring into play certain responses from policymakers. These responses, which are called instruments, entail certain operating characteristics, certain distinctive design and implementation problems. Certain instrument fits with certain problems and objectives better than other instruments do. Policies are typically composed of a variety of instruments (also called tools), and frequently the logic by which these elements are stuck together has more to do with coalition politics than with their operating characteristics, or their basic understanding of expected effects. (Stone, 1997) The tools / instruments of public actions are used to address public problems. (Salamon, 2002) Policy

instruments are that the government uses to put policies into effect. These are the actual means of devices the government has at their disposal for implementing policies, and among which they must select in formulating policy. (Howlett and Ramesh, 2003) Elmore in his 1987 paper classified policy instruments into four main types, namely, mandates, inducements, capacity-building and system-changing. In Chapter 4, we will apply these four types of policy instruments so as to compare and analyze the solid waste management policies in Hong Kong, Taipei and Singapore and try to find out which policy instrument fits with the solid waste problem better. Mandates are rules governing the behaviour of individuals and agencies, and are intended to produce compliance. Inducements are conditional transfers of money to individuals and agencies in return for the short-term performance of certain actions. Capacity-building is the conditional transfer of money to individuals or agencies for the purpose of investment in future material, intellectual, or human resources. System-changing is the transfer of authority among individuals and agencies in order to alter the system by which public goods and services are delivered. (Elmore 1987) Figure 2.1 lists out the policy instruments and their major assumptions.

10

Figure 2.1 - Policy Instruments and their Major Assumptions Primary Elements Mandates Rules Expected Effects Compliances Costs Benefits Examples

Initiators - Enforcement

- Specific benefits to individuals - Diffuse benefits to society

- Environmental regulation

Targets - Compliance - Avoidance

- Non-discrimination requirements - Speed limits

Inducements Money - Production of (Procurement) value - Short-term returns

Initiators - Production - Oversight - Displacement Producers - Overhead - Matching - Avoidance

Initiators /Producers - Increased - Grants-in-aid to budget authority governments - In-kind grants to Clients individuals - Value received

Capacity -building Money (Investment)

- Enhancement of skills, competence; long-term returns

- Short-term costs to initiating government

- Short-term - Basic research specific benefits - Preservation to receiving agency - Long-term, diffuse benefits to society

System -changing
11

Authority

- Composition - Loss of authority of public by established delivery system; deliverers incentives (Source: Elmore, 1987: p.176)

- Gain in authority by new deliverers

- Vouchers - De-institutionalization - New providers

2.1.1

Mandates Salamon (2002) argues that command and control (mandate) are

emphasized by traditional public management as the tools of public programmes. Mandates assume that the action required is something all individuals or agencies should do, regardless of their differing capacities, and that the action would not occur, or would occur with less than the desired frequency, in the absence of explicit prescription. (Elmore, 1987) Mandates typically are assumed to contain all the information necessary for compliance, otherwise it would be difficult for the objects of mandates to know what to do. Mandates also typically create an adversarial relationship between the enforcer and the object, such that compliance is problematical in the absence of enforcement. Since enforcement is costly, and benefits accrue to objects of mandates who can avoid compliance, the implementation of mandates is nearly always characterized by incomplete compliance and enforcement. (Elmore, 1987) Command and control regulation under the category of mandate tends

12

to be quite restrictive in focus where it is a prescription by the government that must be complied with by the intended targets. Failure to do so usually involves a penalty. (Howlett and Ramesh, 2003) For mandates, the central problem is the choice of a package of standards, penalties, and enforcement that delivers an acceptable level of compliance. (Elmore, 1987) Setting standards high relative to the median level of performance communicates high expectations, but it also means a potentially large number of cases of non-compliance, especially if compliance costs are high relative to avoidance costs. In addition, Salamon (2002) argues that mandate is not the appropriate administrative approach in the world of network relationships that increasingly exists.

2.1.2

Inducements Inducements, unlike mandates, rely not so much on government

personnel or governmental authority for its effectiveness, but rather on government financial resources and the governments ability to raise and disburse funds. (Howlett and Ramesh, 2003) Inducements assume that, in the absence of additional resources, one would not expect certain valued outcomes to be produced, or to be produced with

13

the desired frequency or consistency required by policy, and that money is an effective way to elicit performance. Inducements are a form of

procurement-conditional transfers of money in return for the production of goods and services. Inducements assume some commonality of interests between the source of money and the recipients, but the commonality is far from complete. (Elmore, 1987) Activation skills are required to activate the networks of actors increasingly required to address public problem. The government therefore must perform a mobilization and activation role, marketing the new opportunities and encouraging the potential partners to step forward and play their roles. (Salamon, 2002) Recipients vary in their capacity in producing desired results and in their own preferences and objectives. (Elmore, 1987) Common forms of inducements include government grants, tax incentives and loans. Inducements are voluntary and involve an exchange relationship. The upside is that they can cater for unique characteristics of individuals, but the downside is that it does not have direct control over the behaviour of individuals. Inducements also create problems of variability, that is, how much variation can the source tolerate among recipients in the production of valued outcomes and how much should the source invest in narrowing the range of

14

variation. Elmore argues that the central strategic problem of inducements is the choice of a package of money and conditions sufficient to produce the desired goods or services, maximizing quality, while minimizing variability. Setting money and conditions based on the least efficient or lowest quality producers, minimizes variability, but it also means delivering a potentially large surplus to the most efficient or highest quality producers, who presumably can produce what the grantor wants using a fraction of the grant and divert the surplus to their own purposes. Setting money and conditions based on the most efficient or highest quality producers penalizes those at the low end of the distribution, increasing variability in goods and services. Salamon (2002) echoes that it is difficult to decide the provision of just enough subsidy to get private parties to make investments in that particular policy area they might originally avoid, but not so much that it produces windfall profits for doing what the parties would have done anyway. The challenge is to decide what combination of incentives and penalties to bring to bear to achieve the outcomes desired.

2.1.3

Capacity-building Elmore (1987) argues that capacity-building is the transfer of money to

15

individuals or agencies for the purpose of investment in future benefits, such as, material, intellectual, and human resources. It recognizes the inadequacies of existing capacity. It carries the expectation of future returns, and as with all investment decisions, these returns are often uncertain, intangible, and immeasurable. Capacity-building is a passive instrument whereby the government puts out resources with the expectation that individuals and firms will change their behaviour in a desired manner. (Howlett and Ramesh, 2003) For example, the government may launch public information campaign so as to make the population more knowledgeable so that they can make informed choices. However there is no obligation on the public to respond in a particular manner. Capacity serves as a cushion for the authoritys non-decision making. To the degree that short-term results are important to policymakers, they will tend to value capacity less than compliance or short-term production. Yet the effect of future mandates and inducements may depend on capacity that does not presently exist, hence capacity building creates the problem of how to reconcile short-term results of investments with longer-term expectations. For capacity-building instruments, the central strategic problem is how to reckon the present value of future uncertain returns on investment in material,

16

intellectual, and human resources. Setting a high discount rate on future returns, or attaching a relatively low present value of investment in future capacity, means that future capacity to comply and future production of valued goods and services may be compromised for shorter-term results on these dimensions. Setting a low discount rate on future returns means attaching a relatively high present value to future returns on investments in capacity and being willing to forego short-term results in the interest of longer-term capacity. These calculations of present value also depend on how distant the expected returns are and how uncertain their achievement is. If policymakers have a short time preference, or a strong preference for immediate results over longer-time, less certain ones, they will chronically under invest in future capacity. (Elmore, 1987)

2.1.4

System-changing System-changing is the transfer of authority among individuals and

agencies. The expected effect of system broadening or narrowing is a change in the institutional structure by which public goods and services are delivered, and often a change in the incentives which determine the nature and effects of those goods and services. System-changing policies typically alter the distribution of authority and money among competing providers of public goods and services,

17

for example, levels of government, agencies at the same level, public and private providers. (Elmore, 1987) System-changing policies create the problem of how to create new institutional arrangements, how to prevent existing institutions from using their competitive advantage to limit or undermine new institutions, and how to prevent the recipients of new authority from using it in ways that are inconsistent with the expected outcomes of policymakers. (Elmore, 1987) For system-changing instruments, the central strategic problem is how to keep existing institutional interests and incentives from driving new ones out of existence until the new ones have a chance to form. In the case of system broadening, the question is how to keep existing institutions from driving newly-formed ones out of existence before they have an opportunity to demonstrate their capacity. In the case of system-narrowing, the problem is how to assure that the termination of an existing institution does not simply result in its reappearance in another setting with the same institutional interests. If existing institutions have strong political influence on policymakers, the

system-broadening or systemnarrowing policies will tend to reflect existing institutional interests, and vice versa. (Elmore, 1987)

18

2.2

Waste Problem
In this section, we will identify why waste is a problem. Dery (1984)

defines problems as bridgeable discrepancies and opportunities for improvement. He suggests that if problems are thought of as opportunities for improvement, the process of problem definition will be one of search, creation, and initial examination of ideas for solution. The environmental, economic and social implications of a rapidly increasing waste problem have gained recognition over recent decades and the need for a response to the waste management problem on an international scale has long been accepted. (Agamuthu and Hansen, 2007) At the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro Brazil, the international community adopted the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and Agenda 21, an action plan designed to guide the earths development in a sustainable manner. The same goals were reiterated 10 years later at the World Summit on Sustainability Development. (Meyers, McLeod and Anbarci, 2006) One of the greatest problems associates with developing an effective response to the growing difficulties associated with waste management is how to define waste, given it is a subjective notion. (Drackner, 2005) Although many

19

attempts have been made, the issue remains a source of constant debate. The European Union definition of waste is that waste is any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard. (Meyers, McLeod and Anbarci, 2006) But what is discarded by one party may have value for another. Thus, a broad approach to defining waste can include products that are recoverable by others. (Productivity Commission Australia, 2006) Examples are available for supporting this broad approach of waste definition. In Japan, there is a trash trade by adopting plasma technology which is turning waste into energy. (Cyranoski, 2006) The ability to make a living by recovering saleable materials from waste is a key driver for the urban poor, like those in Bangkok, Philippines, and Nigeria. (Wilson, 2007) Solid waste is a by-product of economic growth. Economic growth represents challenges for sustainable resources management and development because continued economic growth implies continued growth in waste outputs. Poor management of waste results in the inappropriate depletion of natural resources and potentially adverse effects on the environment, health and the economy. (Bringezu and Vilby, 2007) Such depletion is unsustainable. Solid waste is classified into five main types by making reference to the sources of waste and the institutional arrangements for waste collection and

20

disposal. These five types of solid waste are municipal solid waste, construction and demolition waste, chemical waste, special waste and other solid waste. (EPD, 2007d) Since municipal solid waste is the major sources of solid waste problem in Hong Kong, we will concentrate on examining this type of solid waste. Municipal solid waste (MSW) includes domestic waste, commercial waste and industrial waste. Domestic waste refers to household waste, waste generated from daily activities in institutional premises and refuse collected from public cleansing services. Public waste cleansing includes dirt, litter and waste collected by the government departments. Commercial waste is waste arising

from commercial activities taken place in shops, restaurants, hotels, offices, markets in private housing estates, etc. Industrial waste is waste arising from industrial activities and does not include construction and demolition waste and chemical waste. Both commercial waste and industrial waste are mainly collected by private waste collectors in Hong Kong. (EPD, 2007d)

It is generally observed that almost half of the non-hazardous municipal solid waste consists of food waste and other green and organic materials, and a further 35% consists of non-separated recyclables. (Meyers, McLeod and Anbarci, 2006) It is important to note that the composition of waste will differ from one country to another, and will even fluctuate with seasonal variations.
21

Waste generation rates are affected by demographics, degree of industrialization, climate and according to collection systems in place in an area. Growth in waste generation appears to be positively correlated with growth in household incomes and corporate earnings. A study in 2000 reported that one-half to three-quarters of the annual resource inputs used in developed countries such as Austria, Germany, Japan and USA are returned to the environment as waste within one year. A study of five developed countries reveals that material outputs to the environment from economic activities range from 11 tonnes per person per year in Japan to 25 tonnes per person in the United States. (Matthews, 2000)

Another study shows that every year Japan produces about 50 million tonnes (about 1 kilogram per person per day) of MSW while the United States is almost twice as wasteful per capita, generating a total of 222 million tonnes in 2005. (Cyranoski, 2006) At this growth rate, economic development challenges the environment's ability to absorb waste without serious degradation. The question of sustainability then arises.

2.3 Integrated Solid Waste Management

Integrated solid waste management (ISWM) is the selection and

22

application of appropriate techniques, technology and management programmes to achieve specific waste management objectives and goals. The United Nations Environment Program states that it is important to approach solid waste management in an integrated manner because: problems are generally solved more efficiently by group-work; adjustments to waste management strategies are coordinated; integration results in efficient use of resources and economies of scale; and industrial, government and community sectors can participate in waste management plans. Other benefits are that standardized techniques create uniformity and levels of waste production and recycling rates can be measured more accurately. (Productivity Commission Australia, 2006)

Waste hierarchy was first introduced in 1977 in the European Unions Second Environment Action Programme. It calls for a move away from disposal towards the more sustainable options of reduction, reuse, recycling and energy recovery. (Wilson, 2007) Waste hierarchies are generally used to develop ISWM plans. A typical waste management hierarchy is comprised of reduce, reuse,

recycle, recover waste by physical, biological or chemical processes, and landfilling, incineration or other disposal method, with the objective of achieving environmental benefits, economic optimization and societal acceptability.

23

(Bortoleto and Hanaki, 2007) An example of waste management hierarchy set by the Victoria Government of Australia is shown as below:

Figure 2.2 -

Waste Management Hierarchy of Victoria Government, Australia

(Source: Productivity Commission Australia, 2006: p. 32)

Waste minimization includes the reduction of use, re-use and recycling. Waste minimization can simply involve changing the operation processes of factory that is good housekeeping, or it can mean complex modifications to manufacturing processes.

Effective waste minimization benefits industry, communities and the environment. Minimizing waste at its source can make production more efficient, enhance business profits, improve environmental health, improve safety
24

conditions for employees and the public, boost public relations and develop waste services and technology with export potential. (Finnveden, et. al., 2007)

Waste treatment techniques include physical, biological and chemical processes such as coagulation, filtering, absorption, stabilization, neutralization, distillation, and other processes that reduce volume or toxicity before final disposal. Other methods of waste management include pyrolysis, gasification, combined pyrolysis-gasification, composting and anaerobic digestion (Tan and Khoo, 2006)

Each of the solutions and techniques however has some shortcomings when compared with the other methods. None can fulfill independently the overall objectives of solid waste resource, reduction and harmlessness. Thus integrated management is the use of various techniques and solutions, including landfill, composting, incinerating, or recycling, to dispose of solid waste comprehensively so as to avoid or lessen the disadvantages and difficulties of utilization of a single technique or solution. (Nie, et. al., 2004)

In addition, policy makers are increasingly embracing product stewardship approaches that place greater responsibilities for end-of-life product disposal on producers in their approach to waste management. (Nicol and

25

Thompson, 2007) Such awareness is emerging not only in communities, but at the corporate and government level.

2.4

Private Sector Involvement

The private sector has influenced the establishment of legally non-binding norms through the development of codes of conduct. In recent years, private industry self-regulation using codes of conduct and trade

association-sponsored industry standards has proliferated, such that industry has now emerged not only as a prominent contributor to environmental problems, but also a resource for solving them.

Waste policies are changing to the focus on lifecycle impacts of products from the cradle to the grave by extending the responsibilities of stakeholders to post-consumer management. Waste can be generated at all points in the life cycle, not just in the post-consumer phase. It can be either disposed or recovered in some ways. The disposal and recycling processes in the product life cycle is shown on Figure 2.3.

26

Figure 2.3

Disposal and Recycling in the Product Life Cycle

(Source: Productivity Commission Australia, 2006: p.18)

To extend the responsibility of stakeholders, product stewardship and extended producer responsibility (EPR) are two policies in use. North America has enacted product stewardship policies but it fails to require producers to take physical or financial responsibility for recycling or for environmentally sound disposal, so that releases of ozone depleting substances routinely occur, which contribute to the expanding the ozone hole. (Nicol and Thompson, 2007)

27

Conversely, European Unions Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive requires extended producer responsibility, whereby producers collect and manage their own post-consumer waste products. WEEE has resulted in high recycling rates of greater than 85%, reduced emissions of ozone-depleting substances and other toxins, greener production methods, such as replacing greenhouses gas refrigerants with environmentally friendly

hydrocarbons and more reuse of refrigerators in the European Union in comparison with North American. (Nicol and Thompson, 2007)

Comparing the outcomes of the North Americas product stewardship with Europes extended producer responsibility, it is obvious that the extended producer responsibility (a mandatory policy) is more effective in reducing the waste volume and increasing the recycling rate.

An international standard for management of environmental policy is also available. ISO 14000 developed by the International Organization for Standardization is a series of international standards for environmental management. A central element of the ISO 14001 standard is that the 'Environmental Policy' should be defined by an organization's top management. A system is defined that ensures that the 'Environmental Policy' is carried out by the

28

organization. This process involves planning, implementation and operations, checking and corrective action, management review and audit. (Meyers, McLeod, and Anabarci, 2006)

ISO 14001 resulted from ISO's involvement in an intensive consultation process, carried out within the framework of a Strategic Advisory Group on Environment, set up in 1991. 20 countries, 11 international organizations and more than 100 environmental experts participated in defining the basic requirements of a new approach to environmental standards. A committee with delegations of business and government experts from 55 countries continues to actively participate in maintaining the ISO 14001 standards. (Meyers, McLeod, and Anabarci, 2006)

Since 2000, the Environmental Infrastructure Division of the Environmental Protection Department of the Hong Kong Government has had its Environmental Management System (EMS) certified under ISO 14001. The scope of the EMS covered all of the division activities, operations and services. The division also urges contractors of new waste management facilities to implement an EMS compliant with ISO 14001 and obtain EMS certification for long-term

29

contracts. (EPD, 2007c) It is a way that the Government can encourage the private sector engaging in the environmental management system.

30

Chapter 3 Background of Hong Kongs Municipal Solid Waste Management

In this chapter, the current situation of Hong Kongs municipal solid waste management will be discussed.

Due to health and environmental considerations, solid waste incineration once in use was closed down in the mid 1980s. Currently Hong Kong solely relies on landfilling for solid waste disposal. Because of Hong Kong's small geographic area and the high cost of land, landfilling is the management option which has limitations in capacity and is unsustainable.

Although around 40% of the waste was recovered for recycling, our landfills will be full in 6 to 10 years if there is no substantial reduction in the generation of waste and the amount of waste that sent to the landfills. (EPD, 2005a)

The Hong Kong Government classifies solid waste into five main types by making reference to the sources of waste and the institutional arrangements for

31

waste collection and disposal. They are municipal solid waste, construction and demolition waste, chemical waste, special waste and other solid waste. Figure 3.1 shows the composition of solid waste disposal for the period of 2001 to 2006. Figure 3.1 Solid Waste Disposal in 2001-2006

25000

20000 Quantity (Tonnes per day)

1534 1903 1588 1109 1620 2274 1746 2549

15000

1749 7519

2040

1635 2645

10000

7551

7402

7014

6828

6634

5000
6408

10202 6728 6595 6556 4125

0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Landfilled construction waste Commercial and industrial waste

Domestic waste Special waste

(Source: EPD, 2007d) Since around half of waste disposed of is consisted of municipal solid waste, this study will analyze the policy on managing MSW only. To better understand the waste problem, it is necessary to understand the current situation of municipal solid waste management in Hong Kong.

32

There are three sources of MSW, namely, domestic waste, commercial waste, and industrial waste. MSW mainly consists of paper (26%), plastics (19%), putrescibles (39%), metals (2%) and glass (3%) as shown on Figure 3.2. (EPD, 2007d) Figure 3.2 Hong Kongs Municipal Solid Waste by Waste Types in 2006
Plastics 19% Paper 26%

Metals 2% Glass 3% Others 11% Putrescibles 39%

(Source: EPD, 2007d) Domestic waste includes households and institutional premises. (EPD, 2005a) Waste collected from residential buildings, public letter bins, streets, marine areas and country parks also comes under this category. Paper and plastics make up significant proportions of domestic waste. Commercial waste includes shops, restaurants, hotels, offices, and markets in private housing estates. Most of this waste is collected by private waste collectors. Sometimes, commercial waste is mixed with domestic waste and is
33

collected by the Government as a public service. (EPD, 2005a) Industrial waste covers all industries, except construction and chemical activities. Industrial waste is usually collected by private contractors. Some companies may deliver their waste directly to landfills for disposal. (EPD, 2005a) Figure 3.3 Per Capita Disposal Rates of Municipal Solid Waste and Domestic Waste in 2001- 2006

1.50 1.40 1.30 kg/person/day 1.20 1.12 1.10 1.00 0.90 0.80 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 1.11 1.10 1.03 1.07 1.00 0.97 1.08 1.39 1.40 1.40 1.35

Domestic waste disposal rate

Municipal solid waste disposal rate

(Source: EPD, 2007d) While our population has grown with an average of only 0.9% per year over the past nine years, over the same period it has generated an annual average of 3.0% more MSW. (Panel on Environmental Affairs, 2008b) This suggests that each individual is producing more waste each year and thus the burden on our scarce and precious land is increasing. Hong Kong is facing with a challenge to find an effective ways to tackle the solid waste problem.

34

Under the political structure in Hong Kong, the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) is headed by a Permanent Secretary, who reports directly to the Secretary for Environment (or the former Secretary for Environment, Transport and Works). EPD is responsible for policy-making and implementation in five programme areas of environmental issues and waste management is one of these programmes. (EPD, 2007c) The Legislative Council has set up the Panel on Environmental Affairs to monitor and examine government policies and issues of public concern relating to environmental matters, conservation and sustainable development. (Panel on Environmental Affairs, undated) To deal with the waste problem, the Hong Kong Government from time to time has carried out various studies, consultations and work plan, such as, the Waste Reduction Study in 1994 and the Waste Reduction Framework Plan (WRFP) in 1998. The WRFP sets out the various initiatives for waste reduction and the progress of the Plan was reviewed in 2001. (EPD, 2005a) Although there was some progress in the overall waste recovery rate, the review recommends a series of measures to facilitate domestic waste separation and recovery and to reduce construction and demolition waste going to landfills in Hong Kong. The Government recognizes the growing waste management problem

35

requiring continued effort both by the Government and the community at large. In December 2005, the Government published the Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014), which set out a comprehensive waste management strategy for the next ten years i.e. 2005 to 2014. (Panel on Environmental Affairs, 2008b) In the Policy Framework, the Government has outlined three objectives for solid waste management:As a community, to make every effort to avoid generating waste and to reduce the amount of solid waste that needs final disposal, by adopting measures to facilitates the separation of discarded material, the recovery and reuse of material and the recycling of non-reusable material; To apply the user-pays principle as a means of reducing volumes of waste for disposal; To adopt advanced technologies and practices to treat waste requiring final disposal and to create new economic opportunities. (EPD, 2005a) In his Policy Address 2007, the Chief Executive reiterated the need for waste reduction and recovering by outlining the way forwards for solid waste

36

management in Hong Kong. The Government intended to implement the polluter-pays principle to achieve waste reduction at source by inducing people to change their living habits, and to encourage recovery and recycling. In the next chapter, the policies on MSW management in Hong Kong, Taipei and Singapore will be discussed and compared in details so as to analyze which policy instruments is more effective in combating the waste problem.

37

Chapter 4 Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Management Policy

In this chapter, we will analyze the Hong Kongs municipal solid waste management policy. Comparing with the experiences of Hong Kong, Taipei and Singapore, this study tries to find out which policy instrument is more effective in tackling the solid waste problem.

The policies on solid waste management in Hong Kong will be evaluated with reference to the overseas experiences. The four policy instruments, namely, Mandates, Inducements, Capacity-building and System-changing, as discussed in Chapter 2, will be adopted for the analysis of the solid waste management policies. Since the municipal solid waste is the major source of solid waste, this study will analyze the policy on the municipal solid waste management. People tend to comply with laws or regulations. There are two traditional ways of explaining such rule-compliance behaviours, namely, Deterrence Theory and Norm Theory. Deterrence Theory assumes that actors are instrumentally rational and

38

know the cost of compliance and the magnitude of the deterrence factors. It is believed that pain and pleasure are the great springs of human action. The principle end of punishment is to prevent like offences. (Tullock, 1974) Norm Theory assumes that internalization of social norms strictly prevents actors from violating norms. It suggests that actors behave according to social norms that prescribe which action is appropriate. (Tyler, 1990) In the following, it can be noted that various policy tools are introduced in Taipei, Singapore and Hong Kong so as to tackle the problem. In the same arena, the effective measures come with fee levying mechanisms and mandatory waste separation measures. Thus, it can be inferred that with legislations being introduced which request citizens to comply with relevant rules and regulations in respect of waste management, they are considered as effective measures in correcting peoples behavior in the short-run. In the long-run, other measures such as incentives schemes (inducement measure) and education (capacity-building measure) are of help in modifying peoples behaviour. Figure 4.1 Facts on Hong Kong, the Taipei City and Singapore1 Hong Kong Area Population Population Density 1 104 sq. km. 6 925 900 6 410 per sq. km. Taipei City 272 sq. km. 2 629 269 9 674 per sq. km. Singapore 704 sq. km. 4 483 900 6 369 per sq. km.

Facts on Hong Kong, the Taipei City and Singapore are from the Hong Kong Yearbook 2006, the Statistical Yearbook of Taipei City 2007 and the 2007 Yearbook of Statistics Singapore respectively. 39

Hong Kong Major Ethnic Group 95% Chinese

Taipei City 98% Chinese

Singapore 75% Chinese

The Taipei City and Singapore are selected for making reference in the municipal solid waste management policies because both their geographical features and nature of solid waste problems are similarity to Hong Kongs. All of the three places are with limited space and with high population density. The major ethnic group of them is Chinese.

4.1 Municipal Solid Waste Management Strategy

To address the serious and imminent municipal solid waste problem in a holistic manner, the governments from time to time develop an overall municipal solid waste management strategy and the governments of Hong Kong, the Taipei City and Singapore are no exception. Figure 4.2 shows the overview of MSW management strategies adopted by the three governments.

40

Figure 4.2 Municipal solid waste disposal, by percentages Municipal solid waste management strategy

Overview of Municipal Solid Waste Management Strategies2 Hong Kong 2006 (a) incineration: 0%; (b) recycling: 45%; & (c) landfilling: 55%. Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014) implemented in 2005. Targets: (a) to reduce the amount of MSW generated by 1 % per annum up to the year 2014, based on the 2003 levels; (b) to increase the recovery rate of MSW to 45% by 2009 and 50% by 2014; & (c) to reduce the total MSW disposed of at landfills to less than 25% by 2014. Taipei 2007 (a) incineration: 43%; (b) recycling: 48%; & (c) landfilling: 7%. Total Recycling and Zero Landfill Programme. Targets: (a) to achieve a series of total sorting and recycling rates between 2005 and 2010: 15%, 33%, 67% and 100% by 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2010 respectively. Singapore 2007 (a) incineration: 43%; (b) recycling: 54%; & (c) landfilling: 3%. Singapore Green Plan 2012 implemented in 2002. Targets: (a) to raise the overall waste recycling rate from 44% to 60% by 2012; (b) to extend the lifespan of the landfill site to 50 years, and strive "towards zero landfill"; & (c) to reduce the need for new incineration plants, from the current target of one every five to seven years to one every 10 to 15 years.

From the strategic level, source reduction and recycling have gained the precedence over other MSW management strategies in all the three places. Among the three treatment methods of solid waste, incineration and recycling are
For the information of Hong Kong, the media challenged the accuracy of Year 2007 figures in Hong Kong so Year 2006 figures are used for analysis instead. (Mingpao Daily, 2008) Sources of information are from EPD websites. For those of Taipei, sources of information are from Department of Department of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, Taipei (2008) and TDEP websites. The sources of information in Singaporeare from Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources, Singapore (2008) 41
2

more important than landfilling in Taipei and Singapore. Landfilling is a common practice in all the three places and Hong Kong heavily relies on it for waste disposal (45%). However, landfilling is perceived to be the least favourable choice because of the difficulties in securing landfill sites. Through incineration, the volume of waste can be reduced by as much as 90%, reducing the amount of waste that will be disposed of at the landfill. The Singapore Government is in the process of restructuring the incineration industry to obtain efficiency gains in the industry through private sector participation. Singapores first privately owned and operated incineration, using

public-private-partnership arrangement, is scheduled to be ready in 2009. Whether such public-private-partnership arrangement will lead to the Faustian bargain3 is unknown, the government can at least have less capital burden in developing new incineration facilities. On the other hand, incineration is yet to be a method of waste disposal in Hong Kong since all the incineration plants were closed in 1980s due to environmental and hygienic concerns. But with advancement in incineration

technology, the Hong Kong Government, as set in its Policy Framework, is exploring the introduction of the integrated waste management facilities (IWMF)

3 Faustian bargain in that forms of PPP may deliver efficiency gains and services improvements in some policy areas but these benefits may involve substantial political and democratic costs. 42

with incineration as the core technology reduction technologies to reduce the volume of unavoidable waste. Tentatively, the Government proposed to develop such facilities in Tuen Mun of the New Territories.4 Figure 4.3 - Process Flow Diagram of an Incineration System

(Source: EPD, 2008;p.23) The proposed IWMF in Hong Kong is in line with both the solid waste strategy in Taipei and Singapore. The unavoidable waste is first incinerated so as to reduce its volume to one tenth of its original size before disposing into the landfills. This system-changing policy can extend the lifespan of the existing
4 A site search was begun in late 2006 for developing state-of-the-art, multi-technology integrated waste management facilities. The IWMF will have a total treatment capacity for 3 000 tonnes per day (tpd) of mixed MWS. It will comprise (a) a thermal incineration plant of about 2 800 tpd capacity and (b) a sorting and recycling plant of a demonstration scale of about 200 tpd capacity. (EPD, 2008) 43

landfills. Through the process, it may also create business opportunities for facilitating recycling and turning the waste into heat energy, just like the Singaporean experiences. However, implementing such system-changing scheme is facing with stiff resistance from the local people and the district council of Tuen Mun.5 Although the incineration is scientifically proven to be harm free, the residents in Tuen Mun do not want to have such facilities in their backyard. The construction of related facilities will adversely affect their well-being as they do perceive that the property price of their properties will decline dramatically. Moreover, they do perceive the construction of such facilities will also worsen the seriousness of air pollution and hygienic condition in the district as they may be subject to the smell of those disposed materials and the problem of flies and mice derived from the facilities when waste disposal or recycling is in operation. The Singapore Government has already gone one step further by inviting private sector to form partnership in owning and operating the incineration facilities while Hong Kong is still on the stage of exploring different options available.

Members of the Tuen Mun District Council on its committee meeting were strongly against for the proposed location of incineration in Tuen Mun. They argued that why Tuen Mun had to be the rubbish bin of the whole territory. (Minutes of the Environment, Hygiene and Local Development Committee, Tuen Mun District Council dated 17.8.2007) 44

4.2

Policy on the Use of Plastic Shopping Bags

In Taiwan, the government has adopted a mandatory measure to restrict

the use of plastic shopping bags. The Waste Disposal Act stipulates that plastic shopping bags must not be offered to customers for free.6 In effect, this restrictive policy has nearly covered all retailers in Taipei. The charging rates for plastic shopping bags may vary depending on the size and volume of the product concerned. (Government Information Office, 2004; Environmental Protection Administration of Executive Yuan, 2006). After the introduction of the restriction on using plastic shopping bags, an investigation result shows the reduction rate in the number of plastic bag used is 58.37% and its weight reduction rate is 79.75%. (Environmental Protection Administration of Executive Yuan, 2007) Based on the investigation result, the mandatory restriction on the use of plastic shopping bags can be perceived to be successful as the restriction does significantly reduce the usage of plastic shopping bags. The levy on its usage does create an economic compulsion for people not to use plastics bags. As the bag is not free, people will compare the cost and benefit in using fee levying plastics shopping bags and may find

The first stage of the policy was launched in October 2002. The use of plastic shopping bags and disposable plastic tableware was restricted in government agencies, government-run enterprises, military units, military general stores, public and private schools, and public hospitals. The second stage commenced in January 2003, extending the policy to department stores, large-scale markets, supermarkets, chain stores, fast food chain stores, and food and beverage stores. 45

alternative for carrying the things they buy. The charging mechanism deters people from using unnecessary plastic shopping bags. In Singapore, there is no such mandatory restriction on the use of plastic shopping bags in place but is with voluntary capacity building Bring your own bag day (BYOBD) campaign. On BYOBD, shoppers are encouraged to bring their own shopping bags. Otherwise, they can purchase reusable bags available at the participating supermarkets or voluntarily donate 10 cents for each plastic bag taken at the checkout counters. (NEA, 2008) The NEP conducted a survey revealing that on average about 60% of shoppers participated either bringing their own bags, buying reusable bags, making donations for checkout bags needed, or declining checkout bags when making small purchases. About two thirds of shoppers surveyed also supported a more frequent BYOBD. (NEA, 2008) The BYOBD, by imposing a charge on checkout bags, helps reduce the usage of one-off shopping bags as it creates an economic compulsion for people doing so. Like Singapore, there is no restriction on the use of plastic shopping bags in Hong Kong but with ongoing voluntary no plastic bag day campaign. To endorse the principle of polluter-pay set out at the Policy Framework, the Hong Kong Government has introduced the Product

46

Eco-responsibility Bill (the PER Bill). The first product eco-responsibility scheme is the introduction of the Environmental Levy on Plastic Bag. The levy is similar to the one set by the Waste Disposal Act in Taiwan so as to restrict the use of plastic shopping bags. The mandatory Producer Responsibility Scheme (PRS) is proposed since it is unfair to require the public to shoulder waste charges while producers are not responsible for disposal of the products they produce. Another reason for its introduction is that the results of voluntary capacity building scheme of no plastic bag day and recovery of recyclables are unsatisfactory. In fact, Hong Kong has already lagged behind many overseas places7 on the implementation of PRS. The Product Eco-responsibility Bill was published in the Gazette on 21 December 2007 and in July 2008, the Legislative Council enacted the introduction of the Bill that the first PER Bill, Environmental Levy on Plastic Bag, will be implemented from April 2009 at its soonest. But there is no roadmap for enacting legislation for other producer eco-responsibility. With the legislation in place, the use of plastic bags is expected to be reduced just like the Taipeis experience. As people are required to comply with

Germany enacted the worlds first packaging law in 1991 requiring the producers to take up environmental responsibility by managing their own package waste. The budding of the packaging law in Germany blossomed around the world. (Friends of Earth (HK), 2008) The European Unions Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directives is a successful example showing how PRS can reduce the amount of waste disposed and increase the recovery rate of recyclables. 47

relevant rules and regulations, they are forced to pay for what they use and therefore may change their behaviour by using less plastic shopping bags. According to the public opinion survey conducted by EPD, around 66% interviewed supported the introduction of the environmental levy and among them, 76% considered that a levy of 50 cents or more would be effective in discouraging the use of plastic shopping bags. (EPD, 2007g ) On the other hand, it may also lead to undesirable outcomes. With a flat scale charging system (for large and small bags), customers may demand the larger shopping bags available even when it is not necessary, hence leading to wastage. The levy may also lead to some shop operators switching to use of alternative bags which may cause other type of waste.

4.3 Municipal Solid Waste Charging Scheme

Both the Taipei City Government and Singapore Government have adopted mandatory municipal solid waste charging scheme as one of their policy instruments to reduce municipal solid waste. The introduction of the waste charging scheme can reduce the free-rider problem which arises because people can take advantage of public goods without contributing sufficiently to their creation. With the mandatory fee on waste disposal, the public produce less

48

pollutants and wastes because they have to pay so as to enjoy the waste disposal service. In 1991, the Taipei City Government (TDEP) started to collect general waste clearance and disposal fees (except in 1999 when the collection was interrupted) in monthly water bills (processing charge of NT$4 for each unit of water consumption). (TDEP, 2005a) Since water consumption and garbage volume are not necessarily related, the Taipei Government has begun charging for general waste clearance and disposal based on the number and size of garbage bags used since 1 July 2000. (TDEP, 2005a) This measure not only improves on the fairness of this fee, but also complies with the polluter-pays principle and provides economic compulsion for citizens to reduce waste and recycle resources. In addition, the City Government has facilitated more sales outlet of TDEP-certified bags so that citizens should find it convenient to buy the garbage bags. At present, there are a total of 2,200 sales outlets of TDEP-certified bags in the city of total area of 27 179 acre (TDEP, 2005b; TDBAS, 2008) The capacity building instrument can smoothen the implementation of the Per Bag Trash Collection Fee policy.

49

Since the Per Bag Trash Collection Fee policy in place, the Taipei City has reduced the quantity of garbage by 51%, upgraded the resource-recycling rate to 27%, and promoted recycling of kitchen wastes to further reduce the quantity of garbage. (TDEP, 2005b) Figure 4.4 Amount of Garbage Clearance and Recycled in Taipei
1800000 1600000 1400000 Metric Tonnes 1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Total Garbage Clearance

Garbage Recycled

(Source: Department of Budget, Accounting & Statistics, Taipei, 2008) Figure 4.4 shows that there is a drastic reduction in the amount of garbage and increase in resource recycling rate since the rollout of the Per Bag Trash Collection Fee scheme in 2002. The scheme as a mandatory policy is a success. The success in garbage reduction may be explained by the Deterrence Theory. People tend to comply with laws and regulations because they do not
50

want to be punished. As such, they have to pay for what they disposed of. If they disposed more, they have to pay more. It creates an economic compulsion for them to dispose less. Such success may also be contributed by other factors, such as, higher public awareness in waste reduction and the implementation of 3-in-1 resource recycling program8. Since recyclables are collected for free and bulky or large trash items are collected for free by appointment with the city trash crews. The 3-in-1 resource recycling program may help to reduce the waste volume and increase the recovery rate to by facilitating Taipei residents to save money on trash fees by separating recyclables from trash items. Prior to 1 April 1996, the Singapore Government was responsible for the collection and disposal of solid waste from households, trade and institutional premises. The solid waste collection and disposal services for these premises were corporatized and taken over by public waste collector (PWC). From 1999 onwards, the Singapore Government divided the country into nine geographical sectors. Successful tenders were appointed as PWCs for their respective sectors for a period of five to seven years to collect and dispose solid waste. (NEA, 2008a)

3-in-1 resource recycling program: waste sorting, recycling and clearance are all done in one step when recycling vehicles follow garbage trucks to collect resources for recycling. 51

The fees imposed on the residents for solid waste disposal in the nine sectors may vary, which are based on the successful tender rates submitted. Nevertheless, the fee structures for domestic and trade premises are standardized that is a fixed monthly rate per domestic premises plus a variable monthly rate for trade premises based on the volume of solid waste generated. (NEA, 2007b) Figure 4.5 - Refuse Disposed of at Authorized Disposal Sites in Singapore (1998-2007)

3,000

2,600 958 (1000 tonnes) 2,200 756

357

251 204 194 220 270 235 187

1,800 2,440 2,036 1,400 1,884

2,551

2,421

2,311

2,263

2,279

2,329

2,380

1,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Incineration Plants

Landfilled

(Source: NEA, 2007a) The introduction of the solid waste disposal fees in 1996 (a mandatory measure) and further liberalization of the collection and disposal services from 1999 helps reduce the amount of waste landfilled. Compare the figures before and after the liberalization of the collection and disposal services, there is a 53%
52

reduction (compare 756 000 tonnes in 1999 to 357 000 tonnes in 2000) in the volume of waste being landfilled. Just like what happened in Taipei, the fee charging scheme requires people to pay for what they disposed of. Before taking the disposal action, people will think twice as disposing less waste means paying less fee. Unlike Taipei and Singapore, there is no fee charging scheme for garbage disposal in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Government launched in January 2005 the source of separation of domestic waste programme, which is a territory-wide voluntary programme aiming at providing suitable recycling facilities for domestic waste at locations as close as possible to their generation sources, and at the same time broadening the types of recyclables to be recovered. (EPD, 2007a) The voluntary programme encourages community participation in recycling and facilities the provision of a reliable source of materials for the recycling industry.

53

Figure 4.6
30% 25% 20% 15%

Domestic Waste Recovery Rate in Hong Kong

26% 10% 5% 0%
20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 12 (T ar ge t)

20% 10% 13% 14% 14% 16%

(Source: EPD, 2007a) As at January 2008, there were 833 housing estates participating in the voluntary programme, covering about 1 million households and some 45% of the population. Around 30% of them have implemented a floor-to-floor mode of waste separation, while the remaining set up waste separation facilities on the ground-floor to collect different types of recyclable materials. The participating estates have reported an average of about 10% reduction in waste disposal since their participation in the programme. (EPD, 2007a) Compare with the Governments goal is to have 80 per cent of the population (around more than 1300 housing estates) participating in the programme by 2010, the voluntary scheme is far from satisfactory. The target of

54

achieving an average of about 10% reduction in waste disposal of the participating estates is perceived to be low, comparing with the rate of waste reduction in Taipei and Singapore before an after the implementation of mandatory measures in waste reduction and recycling. Being a voluntary scheme, there is no deterrence effect since there will be no punishment for people not participating in waste reduction. In order to achieve the targets of waste reduction and recycling, the Hong Kong Government plans to introduce mandatory municipal solid waste charging scheme where people are forced to take part in waste reduction, or they will be charged a fee subject to the volume of waste they disposed. To examine the feasibility of introducing a variable rate charging scheme for municipal solid waste, a three-month trial was launched in 20 housing estates in late 2006 to early 2007 in Hong Kong. At the end of the trial, EPD collected views from stakeholders and examined in further details the feasibility of a charging scheme in light of the feedback received. So far, the result of the trial has not been released and there is no data available for analysis. To sum up, Hong Kong is lagged far behind the progress of the Taipei City and Singapore in introducing the municipal solid waste charging scheme. Based on the experiences in Taipei and Singapore, the volume of waste will be

55

significantly reduced and the recovery rate of recyclables will be drastically increased with the introduction of MSW charging scheme in Hong Kong. The changes in peoples behaviour may be due to the deterrence effects under the fee charging scheme in the short run. In the long run, the social norm may be changed that people regard participating in waste reduction activities as a normal part of their life. Once again, Hong Kong is moving towards mandatory measure from voluntary capacity building measure after the failure of tackling the waste problem by voluntary measures.

4.4 Sorting and Recycling Programmes

There are mandatory recycling programmes in Taipei and Singapore where people are compelled to separate their wastes. People tend to comply with regulations because of the deterrence effect. Being rational, people will compare the cost of compliance to the cost of punishment if they are found to be non-complying. In Taipei, household wastes must be separated into three categories: recyclable waste, kitchen waste and general household waste. Violators are fined. Residents are required to bring the waste to designated locations at a specific time.

56

Garbage in the Taipei City is collected five days a week9 in a 3-in-1 system including sorting, recycling and clearance of waste resources. General waste is collected by garbage trucks at specified times and locations. At present, there are 57 garbage-collection locations plus 53 temporary locations in 12 districts that collect general waste and resources (including food waste), to satisfy the needs of citizens who have unconventional living schedules. (TEDP, 2005d)

The increase in the frequency of garbage collection alone may not have significant impacts on waste reduction. However, with the Per Bag Trash Collection Fee and mandatory source separation of waste scheme in place, this capacity-building instrument can facilitate people to recycle so as to produce less so-called waste and result in pay less trash collection fee.

In Singapore, the mandatory National Recycling Programme (NRP) was introduced in 2001. Under the programme, PWCs are required to tie up with recycling companies to provide door-to-door collection services for recyclables such as paper, plastics, glass and metal cans. Currently, 3 out of every 5 households participate in the programme. (NEA, 2007c) The result of recycling

Since 15 March 2003, the number of days set for resource recycling has increased from 3 to 5 days, encouraging people to sort specific items on separate days. "Flattenable" recyclable wastes are collected on Mondays and Fridays (includes waste paper, secondhand clothing and clean plastic bags); "cubic" recyclable wastes on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays (includes general wastes, clean polystyrene tableware and polystyrene packaging materials). (TDEP, 2005d) 57

programme is encouraging that the recycling rate has increased from 40% in 2000 to 51% in 2006. To better fit different circumstances, the NEA launches three different programmes of recycling: Recycling @ Condominiums Programme,

Recycling @ Schools Programme and Recycling @ Industrial Estates Programme. (NEA, 2007b) All these programmes facilitate the public to carry out waste sorting and thus increase the recycling and recovering rate. With the compulsory recycling programme, people comply with the regulations i.e. recycling in order not to be punished. The drastic reduction in waste and the increase in recycling rate will be achieved in the short run. In the long run, people may be accustomed to recycle whenever they dispose waste. Once it becomes a social norm, individuals will act in accordance with what the society perceives to be appropriate. As waste separation is perceived to be appropriate, individuals will act accordingly. Unlike the mandatory measures in Taipei and Singapore, all the recycling programmes in Hong Kong are voluntary in nature and there is no mandatory requirement for residents to separate their wastes into different categories. For instance, there is a territory-wide voluntary source of separation of domestic waste programme.

58

A voluntary Producer Responsibility Scheme (PRS) has been set up for rechargeable batteries, plastic shopping bags, waste tyres and waste electronic and electrical equipment. In April 2005, a voluntary PRS on rechargeable batteries was set up and by the end of 2006, only 10 per cent of batteries were being recovered. Since the scheme is voluntary that cannot control the behaviour of individuals and is with no inducement for ones participation, the scheme does not significantly increase the recycling rate of rechargeable batteries.

Comparing with the EUs mandatory scheme10, Hong Kongs voluntary scheme on rechargeable batteries can hardly be regarded as successful. Therefore, the Government is introducing mandatory PRSs under which the Environmental Levy on Plastics Bag is the first of this PRS being introduced. It is believed that with the introduction of the levy on plastic bag, the volume of plastic bag disposed can be drastically reduced because of the deterrence effects. The details of Environmental Levy on Plastics Bag are discussed in the previous section.

The European Unions Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive requires extended producer responsibility, whereby producers collect and manage their won post-consumer waste products. WEEE has resulted in high recycling rates of greater than 85%. (Nicol and Thompson, 2007) 59

10

4.5 Incentives provided to the Private Sector Recycling Park

Inducements are conditional transfers of money to individuals and agencies in return for the short-term performance of certain actions. In some occasions, inducements are used to encourage private sector to take part in certain activities. The Hong Kong Government does not usually use this kind of policy instrument as it may be criticized as creating favouritism to a particular group of people and violating the free market principle. To encourage the development of the recycling industry, allocating suitable land solely for recycling purpose at affordable rent is a major measure for supporting the waste recycling industry so as to lower their operation cost. With such incentive, it aims at reducing the financial burden on recycling companies. Both Hong Kong and Singapore have adopted such financial inducement to recycling companies while no such scheme is in place in the Taipei City.

Although there is no recycling park in Taipei, the City Government works with recycling companies. In 2003, there are 108 recycling companies registered under the Department of Environmental Protection. The Taipei City Government inspects the recycling companies on a regular basis (on average, 417 inspections per month) to ensure their performance. (Taipei Health City, 2003)

60

To provide a boost to the local waste recycling industry whereby low cost land is made available for entrepreneurs to operate recycling facilities in Singapore, NEA established the Sarimbun Recycling Park in 1995 and the Tuas Recycling Park in 2002. The lease period for the land parcel in these two recycling parks may be up to 30 years, which has the purpose of encouraging long term investment. (NEA, 2007d)

In the Sarimbun Recycling Park, the twice-renewable three-year lease came at S$0.68 per square metre a month, or a low S$8.6 per square metre a year. For a 20 000 square metre plot, the annual rent amounts to about S$163 000. (The Straits Times, 2003) Such rent is much lower than the market rent so as to encourage recycling companies to move in and develop their businesses.

In Hong Kong, recycling industry is not a major industry as the profit of waste recycling is often marginal. Around 95 % of the waste recovered is exported for recycling.

61

Figure 4.7 -

Recovery of Municipal Solid Waste in Hong Kong (2006)

Exported for recycling (2.73 million tonnes) 43%

Landfilled (3.39 million tonnes) 55%

Recycled locally (0.11 million tonnes) 2%

(Source: EPD, 2007d) The Government encourages materials re-use, recovery and recycling to help achieve waste reduction. Allocating suitable land solely for recycling purpose at affordable rent is a major measure for supporting the waste recycling industry so as to lower their operation cost.

At the end of 2006, a total of 36 sites (about 7.4 hectares) have been allocated to waste recyclers under short term tenancy (EPD, 2007f). The short term tenancy arrangement is different from the Singaporeans tendency for longer term tenancy, say up to 30 years. With the uncertainty in lease period, the recycling companies may not wish to invest in capital intensive facilities.

In addition, the EcoPark is set up to provide the recycling and

62

environmental industry with long-term and well-equipped land at affordable rent to encourage the industry to put more investment into advanced and value-added recycling processes. (EPD, 2007c) Its development will fulfill the vision made in the Policy Address in which long-term land at an affordable price will be provided to encourage the recycling and environmental industry in Hong Kong. The first phase of the EcoPark is leased out in May 2007.11

The Government, by providing cheap land with basic infrastructure, aims at facilitating the development of local recycling industries. With a blossoming local recycling industry, it can help improve the overall recycling culture in the society and stimulate the local economy through job creation. For such short period of time since the first phase is rolled out, whether the objectives of the EcoPark can be achieved is uncertain. Although providing cheap land can be regarded as an inducement, the behaviour of individuals cannot be controlled that is whether the local recycling industry will be induced to take part is uncertain. Only if the benefit is more than the cost of locating in the EcoPark, will the recycling companies operate there. Other factors, such as, labour cost, material cost and other operation cost and competition from nearby cities, will also affect
11

Construction began in 2006 on the $257 million EcoPark in Tuen Mun to provide land and supporting facilities for recycling and environmental industries. Tenancies of Batch I and II were awarded in May and December 2007 respectively. Tender invitation for the tenancies of the third batch of lots for recycling of designated materials in EcoPark Phase I closed on 19 March 2008. Tender assessment is in progress. (EPD, 2007b) 63

the recycling companies decision. A failure example of incentive scheme in Hong Kong is the case of disregarding waste recycling facilities in Gross Floor Area calculation. (Panel on Environmental Affairs, 2008b) Since the developers behaviour cannot be controlled by the voluntary scheme, the introduction of mandatory requirements for new residential buildings to reserve space on each floor for the provision of a refuse storage and material recovery room, becomes essential in order to achieve the desirable outcomes. This example shows the limitation of voluntary scheme and the effectiveness of mandatory scheme. With statutory requirements, the developers are forced to reserve space in future development projects for the provision of a refuse storage and material recovery room.

4.6

Programmes for Encouraging the Use of Recycled Products

Green labelling schemes aim at encouraging the purchase of "greener"

products / services with improved recyclability, reduced packaging, greater durability, and with higher recycled content if possible. Such schemes also reward leadership and initiative in promoting environmental consumerism. In all the three places, the Governments have facilitated the introduction of such programmes to promote the use of recycled products internally and
64

publicly. In the short run, there will be no obvious and significant impact on waste reduction and recycling since there is no mandatory requirement for people to do so. By promotion and education, peoples awareness on environmental issues will be arisen which may then become a social norm to act in an environmental friendly way in the long run. In Taipei, the Green Mark Programme, launched in August 1992 by EPA, aims at promoting recycling of waste and reducing pollution levels. The objectives of awarding the Green Mark are to guide consumers in product purchasing and to encourage manufacturers to design and supply environmental friendly products. In addition, a revised Government Procurement Act was put into effect in May 1999 to promote the priority purchase of green mark products over similar products by allowing a maximum difference of 10% in price on such purchases. Since then, this procurement priority has been extended to other products certified by EPA to be recyclable, low-pollution, energy-saving, and made of regenerated materials. (EPA, 2008)

Similar to the Taipeis experience, the Singapore Environment Council is responsible for implementing the Singapore Green Labelling Scheme (SGLS) to promote green consumerism. SGLS, launched in May 1992, applies to most products, except food, drinks, pharmaceuticals and services. (Singapore
65

Environment Council, updated) Products which comply with the green label standards carry the green label logo. There are currently about 130 green label products, the most visible to consumers being stationery and household cleaning products. The Hong Kong Green Label Scheme is managed by the Green Council. The scheme is an independent, not-for-profit and voluntary scheme for the certification of environmentally preferable products launched in December 2000 by the Green Council. (Green Council, 2007) Various products are under the scheme, such as, paper products, plastic products, cleaning products, stationery. The scheme sets environmental standards and awards "Green Label" to products that are qualified regarding their environmental performance. As with all eco-labelling programs, the aim is to encourage manufacturers to supply products with good environmental performance and provide a convenient means for consumers to recognize products that are more environmentally responsible, thus promoting a more sustainable pattern of consumption.

Similar to the experience of Taipei, as early as Year 2000, the Hong Kong Government amended its procurement regulations to require bureaux and departments to take into account environmental considerations when procuring goods and services. Specifically, bureaux and departments are encouraged to
66

avoid single-use disposable items, and purchase products. For example, the Government, in public works projects, has made use of recycled materials where technically practicable. (EPD, 2006)

The governments, being one of the largest purchasers in the market, can induce producers to produce more recycled products by formulating suitable procurement standards. It can internally require itself to adopt the green procurement but for the general public, the governments tend to encourage voluntary green labeling schemes so as to promote the use of recycled products.

4.7

Education Programmes for Enhancing Public Awareness

Community awareness and education programmes bring environmental

protection into peoples everyday lives and encourage them to change their behaviour. The governments, by producing films, television and radio programmes, books and pamphlets, encourage the public to reduce waste production in their homes, schools and offices. The effects of such policies are not easily observable in the short run. It is almost impossible to develop measurable parameters of the exact contributions arising from education. In the long run, peoples mindset may be changed that environmental protection may become a

67

core part of their live. Once people regard participating in waste reduction as a social norm, they will act accordingly. The Taipei City Government has used the above mentioned means to enhance public awareness on the waste reduction and recycling. Other than the above measures, environmental education is a compulsory subject of the educational curriculum of school children in Singapore. The Singapore Government provides an environmental education package for primary and secondary schools. In addition, a structured waste recycling programme for schools was launched by NEA in 2002. The percentage of schools with the recycling programme has increased from 30% in 2003 to 84 % in 2006 (NEA, 2007b) Like the situation in Taipei, the Hong Kong Government has used various means to enhance public awareness in waste reduction and recycling. The Environment and Conservation Fund is set up and has funded about $21 million for more than 70 community waste recovery projects since 2001, and grants were provided to pair larger green groups and smaller organizations on waste-related projects. For example, the number of students participating in the Student Environmental Protection Ambassador Scheme increased by ten times from 1 659 in 1995/06 to 16 639 in 2006/07.

68

Figure 4.8 - Number of Students Participating in the Student Environmental Protection Ambassador Scheme
18 000

16 000

14 000

12 000 No. of students

10 000

8 000

6 000

4 000

2 000

0 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07

(Source: EPD, 2007c) The contribution to the waste reduction devised from promoting community awareness and education can hardly be quantified. Nevertheless, capacity-building works serve as an indicator for the inadequacies of existing capacity in waste reduction and recycling. In the long run, people may change their mindset and perceive participating in waste reduction appropriate. Capacity building instruments, with little interference to the interests of stakeholders, are one of essential parts in the waste management strategy.

69

4.8 Summary of Policy Instruments

With the above comparison of the three places policies on municipal solid waste management, we can categorize the policies as shown in Figure 4.9. Figure 4.9 - Policy Instruments in Municipal Solid Waste Management Tools Mandates Policy Instruments Compulsory collection / recycling Fee charging Description Legislation to enforce individuals to separate, collect and recycle wastes Legislation to enforce individuals / producers to pay for the use of resources (plastics shopping bags) or services (garbage collection and disposal) Raising the price of collection and disposal so as to induce the user to pollute less according to the volume of disposal Providing cheap land to reduce the financial burden to the recycling industry Changing the individuals behaviour and the social norms through various publicity campaigns and education to enhance public awareness in waste reduction Developing an integrated waste facilities management to reduce the volume of waste and to extend the lifespan of landfills Governments take the initiates to implement green procurement policies in preferences to recycled and recyclable materials Legislation to enforce individuals / producers to pay for the use of resources (plastics shopping bags) or services (garbage collection and collection)

Inducements Waste disposal levies

Grants/Subsidies Capacity -building Education

ISWM

System -changing

Green procurement

Fee charging

70

Tools

Policy Instruments Producer responsibility ISWM

Description Changing the responsible parties of handling waste from the government to the producers Developing an integrated waste facilities management to change the procedures of waste disposal so as to reduce the volume of unavoidable waste and to extend the lifespan of landfills

Comparing the three places experiences in municipal waste management, mandates are found to be the most effective instrument in achieving the predefined policy objective of waste reduction and recycling. Because of the deterrence effect and the influence of social norms, people tend to comply with regulations and rules (i.e. mandatory measures). For example, the Per Bag Trash Collection Fee scheme in Taipei brings a drastic reduction in the volume of waste disposal and a significant increase in the recycling rate. On the other hand, inducements being voluntary in nature may not bring desired results, such as, the voluntary separation of domestic waste programme and the recycling of rechargeable batteries scheme in Hong Kong. Capacity-building aims at investing in capacity for the future and its short term result is difficult to measure. Education on waste reduction is a good example of capacity-building. It may arouse public awareness on waste management but public awareness doe not necessarily bring a high participatory rate in waste reduction and recycling.
71

System-changing is the transfer of authority among individuals and agencies in order to alter the system by which public goods and services are delivered. In the case of Hong Kong, the government is introducing various fee charging schemes so as to shift the burden of waste management to the producer and consumer from the government. For instance, the introduction of the integrated solid waste management with incineration is facing with strong resistance from various stakeholders. To make the solid waste management sustainable, the introduction of all the four policy instruments is usually the way that the Government adopts since each policy instruments are with its own merits and limitations. To achieve an immediate and definite effect for a particular policy, mandates are the most effective measure. Then the question comes to why the Hong Kong Government is lagged-behind in introducing the mandatory measures in combating the MSW management. This question will be discussed in Chapter 5.

72

Chapter 5 Institutional Analysis of Policy Instruments

In this chapter, we will use different institutional frameworks to examine why the Hong Kong Government is reluctant / slow in implementing the mandatory measures to tackle the municipal solid waste problem. They are agenda setting approach, redistribution of wealth, and cost-benefit analysis.

5.1

Agenda Setting
The process of how an issue comes to the public agenda and then the

government agenda is known as agenda setting.

According to Kingdon (1995),

the answers are concentrated on three explanations, namely, problems, politics and visible participants.

5.1.1

Problems The impact of the municipal solid waste problem has not been widely

recognized. There is no focusing event, which is widely reported in the media, helps shape the agenda setting process. In January 2008, the media widely reported that the residents of the Italian city of Naples have been torching piles of rotting rubbish in the streets.
73

Amid a worsening refuse crisis, the only landfill site of Naples is expected to be full within a week as at the day of news reporting. 12 Hong Kongs waste management problem is not at such a critical stage as Napless is. Landfill problem is still perceived not as an eminent issue as the Hong Kong Government estimates that the existing landfill sites can last for another 5 to 6 years.

5.1.2

Politics As suggested by Kingdon (1995), the explanations for high or low

agenda prominence are in the political stream.

Independently of problem

recognition or the development of policy proposals, political events flow along according to their own dynamics and their own rules. In the environmental issues, there has been a swing in the community mood regarding air pollution problem but not solid waste problem. The media and the visible participants have played a very important role in directing the flow of the political stream, which will be discussed below.

5.1.3

Visible Participants Kingdom (1995) defined policy entrepreneurs as advocates who are

12

Both the Hong Kong TV media and BBC Worldwide News (4.1.2008) have reported the news of rubbish crisis in Naples. 74

willing to invest their resources (including time, energy, reputation and money) to promote a position in return for anticipated future gain in the form of material, purposive, or solidary benefits. In the case of waste management, apart from the

Government, policy entrepreneurs include interest groups, professional bodies and politicians. 5.1.3.1 Interest Groups and Professional Bodies Conservationists have been advocating waste reduction and recycling for a long time, but the issue failed to be put on the public agenda. To force the issue onto the pubic and government agenda, it needs the joined forces of the interest groups, activists and professionals, coupled with the wide media coverage. In the solid waste management, no such joint effort is observed although conservationist groups, such as, the Friends of the Earth (HK) and the Conservancy Association, have been advocating for waste reduction and recycling for years. As suggested by Chan Wai-kwan of the Conservancy Association (2007), civil society faces many constraints, in capacity such as knowledge base, manpower and funding; in social capital so that their effort bears fruit, and in institutional ability to sustain their role in society. After being repeatedly

disappointed by the Government, these interests groups may lack the driving force

75

and resources to sustain their campaigns in waste reduction and recycling. 5.1.3.2 Politicians Many politicians ride on the rising public sentiments and put the particular hot topic on their election platforms. This has further enhanced public

awareness and the perceived importance of the subject. Since the municipal solid waste management is not the major public concern, the politicians cannot and will not ride on public sentiments. Cost is not justified by those political parties in promoting public awareness in environmental issues, as the benefits expected to be obtained is somewhat not in a balance. In times when elections come, political parties are engaged in their election campaigns, where most of the efforts is being spent in issues which are echoed most by the public, such as economic development, employment, inflation and even the cross-border cooperation with the Mainland counterparts, which are perceived to be directly affecting the publics livelihood. Unlike those economic-related issues, environmental issues are less echoed by the public and thus less and even no effort will be spent by those political parties, which perceive only a small portion of the Hong Kong population may have concern about. Furthermore, those political parties do not possess adequate technical expertise to tackle those environmental problems when they arise,

76

compared to those of interest groups such as Friends of the Earth (HK), which may devote all its resources and expertise in tacking with all these problems. The manifestos of the four major political parties in Hong Kong are studied. Environmental issue is either not mentioned or in a less prominent position in their manifestos. The manifestos of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progression of Hong Kong (DAB) and the Democratic Party (DP) include environmental issues as one of their concerns. DAB listed it as the last item of their twelve concerns while DP listed it as the thirteenth out of twenty-three items. The Liberal Party and the Civil Party have not mentioned environmental issue on their manifesto at all. The reason behind the political parties lack of interest in the environmental issue is that the inclusion of such issue onto their manifesto cannot bring any significant benefits in gaining public supports. According to a survey conducted by Hong Kong University (HKU) Public Opinion Programme in September 2007(Appendix II), only 1.2%, 1.9% and 4.4% of people responded expected the Chief Executive should regard Environmental issues as the point of focus in his first, second and third policy addresses respectively. The environmental issue ranked number 7 or 8 while the issues on Economic Development and Labour and Employment are the top considerations by the

77

people surveyed. As a result, solid waste management, being one of sub-topics under environmental issues, is not one of the top public concerns. It is therefore rational to see that the political parties do not put the solid waste problem (or the environmental issue at large) on top of their agenda. We can see that both the politicians and the public do not regard the solid waste as a major concern. Waste problem therefore is not on top of policy agenda for immediate remedies.

5.1.4

Role of the Mass Media The mass medias role in bringing the issue to spotlight was pivotal to

the agenda setting process. In fact, agenda setting theory was first introduced by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw (1972) in their ground breaking study of the role of the media in the 1968 presidential campaign in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The

theory explains the correlation between the rate at which media cover a story and the extent that people think that this story is important. As for the medias strategy of agenda setting, firstly, framing is a process of selective control over media content or public communication. It

78

defines how a certain piece of media content is packaged so that it will influence particular interpretations. This is accomplished through the use of selection, emphasis, exclusion, and elaboration (McCombs, Shaw and Weaver, 1998). Secondly, gatekeeping is a control over the selection of content discussed in the media; what the public know and care about at any given time is mostly a product of media gatekeeping (Clayman and Reisner, 1998). For

example, more coverage on solid waste management is found on the newspapers in 2005 (compare to 29 and 61 news clips in 2004 and 2005 respectively) when the Policy Framework was published on that year. However, the media do generally not have wide coverage on the issue of solid waste management. Figure 5.1 shows that on average, there is less than 50 news clips is on solid waste management. The mass media has a wider coverage on another environmental issue i.e. air pollution problem.

79

Figure 5.1 - Number of News Clips

300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 On "Waste Management" or "Waste Recycling" On "Air Pollution"

(Source: Wisenews)

5.1.5

Governments Priority Other than the publics attitudes towards solid waste management, we

have to analyze the Hong Kong Governments attitude: whether MSW is on the top policy agenda that the Government is willing to spend resources and pay cost for bringing the desirable outcome. The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) was created in 1986 to co-ordinate and carry out pollution prevention and control activities. Not until the introduction of the Principal Officials Accountability System in July 2002, did the environmental issue become a key policy area under the then Environment,

80

Transport and Works Bureau. With the growing concern on environmental issue, a new Environment Bureau was formed in 2007 overseeing the formulation and implementation of environmental policies. Solid waste management is one of the five policy arenas under the Environment Bureau. Hong Kong people traditionally concern about the economic development most as the up and down of the economy greatly affects their livelihood. Following such priority, the Government usually allocates around $8 843 million (or 4.1%) only on the policy arena of environment and food in its financial budget. With the 4.1 % of the total budgetary allocation, the actual amount spent on combating solid waste management is far less. On the budgetary point of view, we can see that the environmental issue is not on the top of the government agenda. Through the above analysis, solid waste management is not brought onto the public agenda and the government agenda, unless a trigger-off event has taken place which may affect the well-being of the Hong Kong citizens. Without such an event being taken place, it is believed that no proactive measure will be formulated by both the government authorities and political parties in selecting which will be the best approach in tacking the municipal solid waste issue, regardless whether the mandatory policy is considered to be an efficient and

81

effective approach. The rationale behind is that the political cost of implementing mandatory policy is always higher than other kinds of policy instrument as the stakeholders who are worse off will have great resistance to the new mandatory policies.

5.2

Redistribution of Wealth
According to Kaldor-Hicks criterion, a policy should be adopted if and

only if those who will gain could fully compensate those who will lose and still be better off. (Boardman, et al, 1996; Frank, 2000) In the waste management, there are two distinctive situations that the Kaldor-Hicks criterion should be taken into consideration for explaining why a particular policy is not adopted or is difficult to be adopted. The first situation concerns about the development of integrated waste management facilities (IWMF). Although the worldwide experience shows that IWMF can help to reduce the waste problem, its development and implementation usually face strong resistance from interest groups. The Hong Kong Government in its Policy Framework proposed to develop an IWMF with incineration in Tuen Mun. The details are discussed in Chapter 4. Although the Government guarantees that the facilities will pose no

82

threat nor harm to its neighbour, no one likes such facilities in ones backyard and therefore the local District Council strongly objects such proposal13. With such facilities nearby, the land value will adversely affected. Under the Kaldor-Hicks criterion, the policy should be adopted if and only if those who will gain could fully compensate those who will lose. However, it is almost impossible for the Government to compensate the local without drawing criticism from other groups as the facilities are proven to be harm free but with psychological impacts.14 If the Government pays monetary compensation to the nearby landowner, what is the appropriate compensation level? Should the subsequent landowner be compensated as well? All those questions are not easy to answer. Without the support of the general public, the one who is worse off will not compensated. Another situation that draws the Kaldor-Hicks Criterion is about who is / are responsible for the financial burden on waste management. Originally all the costs of municipal solid waste management, including the garbage collection fee and transportation cost, operation of the landfill, and any other related administrative cost, are borne by the government. Individuals do not have to pay a single penny directly out of their pockets. If the user-pay principle is adopted in
13

Members of the Tuen Mun District Council on its committee meeting were strongly against for the proposed location of incineration in Tuen Mun. They argued that why Tuen Mun had to be the rubbish bin of the whole territory. (Minutes of the Environment, Hygiene and Local Development Committee, Tuen Mun District Council dated 17.8.2007) 14 According to a website of public forum manned by the Sustainability Development Council, no one agreed to compensate those living near the incineration facilities. (Council for Sustainable Development., 2004) 83

charging the households to pay for the waste they disposed of, the financial burden is shifted to individuals from the government. Despite the difference in wealth, each individual has to bear the same level of financial burden depending on the volume of the waste disposed. As the Hong Kong Government adopts the direct and progressive tax regime, tax rate increases as the amount subject to taxation increases. In other words, it imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the rich than on the poor. The Government coffer is collected from taxes being paid by the richer rather than by the poorer. The shifting of the burden from the Government to individuals suggests that the poor also have to bear the financial burden on waste management and become worse off. Such mandatory policy which is somewhat regarded as a regressive system where the rich has only to spend a very small proportion of his wealth to that of the poor in fulfilling the obligation in respect of the polluter-pay principle, even though the same level of waste has been produced. Bearing the Kaldor-Hicks criterion in mind, it is difficult in ensuring those who will gain (i.e. the rich) could fully compensate those who will lose (i.e. the poor) and still be better off. The mandatory garbage fee charging scheme may also pose a doubt on equity in respect of wealth or income redistribution.

84

Equity has a connotation relating to redistribution, to channeling benefits disproportionately to those who lack them. Achieving such redistribution is one of the principal rationales for public action. (Salamon, 2002) 15 A progressive tax is a tax imposed so that the tax rate increases as the amount subject to taxation increases. In many societies, moderate attempts are made through property redistribution, taxation or regulation to redistribute capital and diminish extreme inequalities of wealth. Frank (2000) argues that the basic premise of the redistribution of income is that money should be distributed to benefit the poorer members of society, and that the rich should be obliged to assist the poor. It is argued that the cost of government must be borne by those best able to afford it. The rich therefore should pay higher taxes. The Hong Kong Government, though with a low tax regime, adopts the progressive tax system which imposes a greater burden on the rich than on the poor. The current municipal solid waste management follows the

redistribution of wealth model that all the costs are borne by the government, which is indirectly borne by those who pay taxes (the richer). Although it is argued that the redistribution of wealth punishes good economic activity whilst rewarding poor economic activity resulting in an

15

Another definition of equity mentioned by Salamon is that the distribution of benefits and costs more or less evenly among all those eligible. 85

inefficient economy, it avoids unjust extremes of concentration of wealth on a group of people. Not adopting the polluter-pay principle cannot discourage the polluter to produce less waste since there is no incentive in doing so. Such behaviour will not result in an efficient economy. The current MSW management is in line with the redistribution of wealth principle. During the past decade, the distribution of wealth in Hong Kong becomes more uneven. The rich gets richer and the poor gets poorer. The current practice can help ease the uneven distribution of wealth and will not trigger public protest on criticizing governments collision with the rich one. As solid waste management regarded as a public service, the principle of redistribution of wealth may help to explain why the government is reluctant / slow in implementing the mandatory schemes in waste reduction and recycling.

5.3

Cost-benefit Analysis
In the municipal solid waste management, there are a lot of policy

alternatives as discussed in Chapter 4, such as, mandatory measures for source separation of domestic waste, voluntary scheme for public participation, fee charging schemes, development of integrated waste management facilities. Mandatory measures are found to be more effective. The question comes to why

86

such policy instruments have not been chosen for implementation. The cost-benefit analysis can be used to assist the government in the policy making process. In the public domain, the government should act in the same way as a profit-maximizing firm on behalf of society as a whole. According to Boardman, the cost-benefit analysis provides a protocol for measuring the allocative efficiency of societys resources by demonstrating the superior efficiency of a particular intervention relative to the alternatives, including the status quo. The government should conduct the cost-benefit analysis so as to find out which policy instrument is more efficient. Based on the analysis of Chapter 4, it is inferred that mandatory policy is more effective in waste reduction and recycling. Effective measure does not necessarily come with efficiency.16 It is doubted that such policy is efficient based on the cost-benefit analysis. When comparing the costs and benefits associated to alternatives solution to waste problem, the following parameters should be taken into consideration: impacts on waste to landfill, financial impacts on government and stakeholders (e.g. implementation costs and staffing) and potential value of the

16

Effectiveness measures the extent to which an activity achieves its intended objectives while efficiency concerns the balance between benefits and costs. (Salamon, 2002) 87

gain or loss due to the initiatives. All these parameters will be turned into monetary term for comparison.

5.3.1

Case Study

Environmental Levy on Plastic Shopping Bags

In the following, the cost and benefits of different options of reducing the use of plastic shopping bags will be analyzed as an example. The Hong Kong Government commissioned a private company to conduct an assessment of benefits and effects of plastic shopping bag charging scheme in 2006. (EPD, 2007g) In the study, four options aiming at reducing the use of plastic bags are identified and assessed: Option 1: voluntary approach; Option 2: supplier levy and consumer levy; Option 3: consumer charge at all retail outlets; and Option 4: consumer charge at selected retail outlets.

The study examined the benefits and effects arising from the four options, including, impact on number of bags, impact on waste to landfill, estimated financial impacts on consumers, potential value of the loss of sales to the Hong Kong market, implementation costs and staff, impact on government finances, and the switching effects on using alternatives. (EPD, 2007h)

88

The study estimated that fee charging options (Option 2, 3 and 4) could reduce the amount of plastic shopping bags used by 11% to 44 % while the voluntary option (Option1) could reduce 3% only. Based on the study findings, we can say that mandatory options (Option 2, 3, and 4) are more effective in achieving the objective of reducing the use of plastic shopping bags than voluntary options are. However, the Hong Kong Government has been adopting the voluntary measures since its first launching the voluntary No Plastic Bag campaign in 1993. Given the effectiveness of the mandatory scheme, why the Hong Kong Government does not adopt such measures for the past 15 years? Comparing the benefits and impacts of all the four options, the study found that reducing indiscriminate shopping bag use through voluntary measure (Option 1) is the most efficient solution. Although the overall reduction in plastic shopping bag use will likely be less than a Government imposed charging scheme, Option 1 has merits in being simple and cheap to implement. Retailers and consumers, who are participating voluntarily in the scheme, will not switch to alternatives. Under the mandatory charging measures, retailers will seek for providing other kind of free bags to customers (e.g. paper bags) so as to enhance their competitiveness and to retain their market share. These measures will result in producing more waste to landfill i.e. the increase in waste volume of

89

non-plastic bags is larger than the reduction in waste volume of plastic shopping bags. So the mandatory measures are not efficient in terms of the overall waste reduction. When considering cost impact on government, the government does not have to spend much staffing and money on monitoring the implementation of voluntary scheme. Expenditures will mainly concentrate on education and promotion activities. On the other, the implementation cost and staffing for mandatory scheme is much higher. Regulation without enforcement is with little use because people will not be punished even if they do not comply with. The deterrence effect of law and regulation will be adversely affected. The government therefore has to spend more resources to ensure peoples compliance with mandatory measures. It will increase the costs and therefore affect its efficiency. Under the cost-benefit analysis, it is found that although the mandatory options are more effective, they are not more efficient. On the other hand, the voluntary option is more efficient and is the most likely to yield benefits in terms of reductions in the waste stream. This may help explain why the reluctance in adopting the mandatory measure in tackling the waste problem.

90

5.3.2

Other factors Contrary to the conclusion drawn from the cost-benefit analysis, the

Hong Kong Government decided to introduce the Environmental Levy on Plastic Shopping Bags which is likely to be rolled out in 2009. The reason for the change in the Governments attitude can be explained by a number of factors. The Government recognized that inaction is costly and something has to be done. The current practice of waste management is unsustainable and the landfill can only last for another couple of years if no alternative solution is present. In the 2005 Policy Framework adopted the user-pays principle as means of reducing volumes of waste for disposal. The user-pays principle is

an overriding objective in waste reduction. Such political concern overrides the recommendations drawn from the cost-benefit analysis. The mandatory fee charging scheme, not being efficient, is in line with the user-pays principle and therefore should be adopted. Publics attitude towards the user-pays principle is also crucial. According to the public opinion survey conducted by EPD, 84% and 66% interviewed supported the introduction of polluter pays principle and the

91

environmental levy on plastic shopping bags respectively. Among those supported of the introduction of the environmental levy on plastics shopping bags, 76% considered that a levy of 50 cents or more would be effective in discouraging the use of plastic shopping bags. (EPD, 2007g) The positive attitude of general public towards the introduction of the environmental levy is a good sign for the government acting accordingly. Although the direct contribution to waste reduction from the environmental levy on plastic shopping bags will be minimal17, it helps pave the ways for other mandatory schemes, such as, garbage fee charging scheme and compulsory waste separation scheme. With the above factors being weighed, the Government has been becoming more willing and active in introducing the mandatory measures to tackle the solid waste problem.

17

According to the EPD study, plastic shopping bags account for just an estimated 1.8% of the waste by wet weight and less by bulk. (EPD, 2008h) Any plastic charging scheme will therefore have little positive effect on the overall weight of waste to landfill. 92

Chapter 6 Conclusion

Hong Kong is faced with an imminent waste problem as our landfills, which are currently the only means for waste disposal, will be running out of space in the early to mid 2010s. To reverse the rising trend of waste requiring disposal, the Hong Kong Government has been taking various measures to promote waste reduction and enhance source recovery for recycling. In 2005, the Government introduced the Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste in Hong Kong (2005-2014) which set out a comprehensive waste management strategy for the next ten years. Various policy instruments are applied so as to reduce the volume of municipal solid waste, to increase the recovery rate of MSW and to reduce the total MSW disposal at landfills. This study aims at analyzing different policy instruments and finding out which policy instrument is more effective in combating waste problem, and the reasons for the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government in implementing the most effective policy instrument. The study uses comparative method to evaluate different policy instruments adopted by the governments of Hong Kong, Taipei and Singapore on various policy arenas of municipal solid waste management.

93

Based on the results of these policy instruments, it is found that mandate is the most effective measure in combating waste problem and the Hong Kong Government is far lagged behind other governments in adopting such effective policy instrument. Different analytical frameworks are used to find out why the Hong Kong Government is reluctant / slow in implementing mandatory measures. Under the agenda setting approach, it is found that the solid waste management is not brought onto the public agenda and the government agenda unless a trigger-off event happens. Without such an imminent need, the political cost of implementing mandatory policy on solving waste problem is always higher than other kinds of policy instrument as the stakeholders who will be worse off will have great resistance to the new mandatory policy. The principle of redistribution of wealth is also used to justify the Hong Kong Governments reluctance in implementing mandatory measures where all the people have to shoulder the burden. Lastly, cost-benefit analysis is used to explain the reluctance of the Hong Kong in implementing mandatory measures to combat waste problem. Although the benefits devised from the voluntary measures in waste management is low, there will be little resistance in its implementation because of its voluntary in nature. On the other hand, the benefits

94

derived from mandatory policy is perceived to be high but the cost associated with such implementation is perceived to be high as the financial cost is likely to be strong. Being involuntary in nature, people may find means to get rid of the mandatory measures. From the cost-benefit perspective, it can explain the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government in implementing mandatory policy. With the change in the Governments attitude, the mandatory measures is becoming more common in tackling the solid waste problem. Application of different policy tools are found in various policy arenas from environment, economics, education, labour, social welfare and so on. Municipal solid waste management is only one of the many policy arenas that the government has to deal with. The governments determination in dealing with a particular problem is highly likely affected by the political mood in the society. For instance, the society nowadays concerns about the heritage conservation and those associated with collective memories. In response to the publics concern, the Hong Kong Government in 2007 set up a new Development Bureau and one of its main responsibilities is to overview the heritage conservation policy. When we consider the adoption of particular policy tools, we should bear in mind the social mood other than the cost-benefits analysis.

95

As mentioned earlier, the presence of a trigger-off event may arouse public awareness and change the public sentiment over a particular issue, however, such relationship cannot be established unless further research is carried out. If such further research is being conducted, emphasis should be put on performing data analysis so as to ascertain whether after the presence of a particular trigger-off event (which may need to be further defined), public awareness over a particular issue may increase, which results in speeding up the process of a particular public policy formulation and execution. Recent events such as the removal of the Star Ferry and Queens Piers, which results in speedy action by the Development Bureau in conserving King Yin Lei (a historical building) is a good illustration which warrants further research interest.

In addition, at the time of writing, the Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste in Hong Kong (2005-2014) has been published for about three years and not all the measures are already in place. It still takes time to evaluate whether all the measures are successful in achieving its objectives and targets. Nevertheless, comparing with the experience in Taipei and Singapore, Hong Kong is far lagged behind in adopting a comprehensive solid waste management strategy and mandatory policy (the most effective policy instrument) in combating waste problem.
96

It should also be borne in mind that one of the constraints of the study is that no primary data is collected for analysis. All the data and information are from secondary sources only. Another major limitation is that no field study for the Taipei City and Singapore is taken place and the study solely relies on the information published by the governments and other authors.

97

Appendix I Milestone for Solid Waste Management in Hong Kong (1990- 2007)
2007 Adopted a policy commitment in the Chief Executives 2007-08 Policy Address to introduce the Product Eco-responsibility Bill to provide a legal framework for implementing producer responsibility schemes, and to study the extension of existing landfills and the use of incineration as a way of waste disposal. 2006 Adopted the theme "Be Responsible for Our Environment, I Can and So Can You" for World Environment Day 2006 to educate the public on their responsibility to reduce waste. Issued a circular memorandum to implement a policy commitment in the Chief Executive's 2005-06 Policy Address to subject all new major government policies to environmental protection scrutiny. The circular stipulates the guidelines and procedures that all bureaux/departments should observe when formulating policy proposals with potential environmental implications. Started charging for disposal of construction waste. Invited Expressions of Interest for establishing environmental and recycling businesses in the EcoPark. Launched the first "No Plastic Bag Day" on April 15. Riding on the success, major green groups continued to organise monthly "No Plastic Bag Days" between June and December with the support of the EPD. Ten major retail chains, including the three largest supermarket chains, agreed to continue the campaign in 2007 on a self-supporting basis. Enacted the Waste Disposal (Amendment) Ordinance 2006 to tighten control on the disposal of imported waste, and to provide legal back up for the Basel Ban on the import of hazardous waste from developed countries. Shipped the first batch of rechargeable batteries (13 tonnes) collected under the "Rechargeable Battery Recycling Programme", to a recycling facility in South Korea. Organised a forum for the property management sector to share successful experiences on source separation of domestic waste in housing estates, and issued the "Guidebook on Source Separation of Waste in Residential
98

Buildings". Started construction of EcoPark Phase I. Awarded a contract for the provision of management services for EcoPark. Launched a three-month Trial Scheme on Municipal Solid Waste Charging at 20 housing estates to examine the feasibility of introducing a variable rate charging scheme for municipal solid waste. Substantially completed a consultation with stakeholders on a new set of risk-based land contamination standards for Hong Kong. Saw the Environment and Conservation Fund agree to allocate $10 million for a public education programme under "A Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014)". Started the tender invitation for tenancies of the first batch of Phase I lots in EcoPark for recycling designated materials. Enlisted 497 housing estates/residential buildings (reaching some two million people) to join the Programme on Source Separation of Domestic Waste. 2005 Saw the merger of the Environmental Protection Department and the Environment Branch of the Environment, Transport and Works Bureau on April 1. Set aside $5 million under the Environment and Conservation Fund to support the implementation of Source Separation of Domestic Waste in private housing estates. Organised the first Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Recycling Day and "Zero Waste" walk to echo the Environmental Protection Festival 2005. Broadcast a series of one-minute TV programmes and a 30-minute TV programme to promote waste reduction. Launched the programme on source separation of domestic waste territory-wide with the aim of having 80 per cent of the population in Hong Kong take part by 2010. Launched the territory-wide Rechargeable Battery Recycling Programme to recover all types of rechargeable batteries. This was a good example of tripartite collaboration between the trade, green groups and the Government in implementing a voluntary producer responsibility scheme. Commissioned the Low-level Radioactive Waste Storage Facility at Siu A Chau. Saw membership of the Wastewi$e Scheme exceed 1 000.
99

Published "A Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014)" which sets out a comprehensive strategy for municipal solid waste management in Hong Kong for the ten years from 2005 to 2014. Commenced implementation of the Construction Waste Disposal Charging Scheme. 2004 Implemented the Waste Recycling Campaign in Housing Estates (Phase VIII), in which 1 420 housing estates participated. Organised a series of education and publicity programmes in the weekends of June to celebrate Hong Kong World Environment Day 2004 with the theme "Polluter Pays Principle". Co-organised a briefing session on Source Separation of Waste with the Hong Kong Association of Property Management Companies Ltd. Signed a Supplemental Agreement with the contractor of NENT Landfill on the export of landfill gas for beneficial uses. Opened the Sai Tso Wan Recreation Ground for use by the public - the first permanent recreational facility built on a restored landfill in Hong Kong. Saw the Legislative Council approve the Waste Disposal (Amendment) Bill No.2 2003 to enable charging for disposal of construction waste at waste disposal facilities and to enhance control of illegal dumping of waste. Launched a pilot programme on source separation of waste, which aims to facilitate residents in separating waste at source by providing waste separation facilities on each floor. The programme also broadens the types of recyclables recovered in order to further increase the waste recovery rate and reduce waste. Saw the Wastewi$e Scheme enter its fifth year as one of the key initiatives to promote voluntary waste reduction and recycling in the private sector. This year the number of Wastewi$e Logo recipients exceeded 200 for the first time, reaching 203. More than 90 000 tonnes of waste have been reduced and recycled by Wastewi$e Logo recipients, resulting in substantial savings in landfill space and disposal cost. Commissioned a detailed feasibility study to investigate sludge treatment facilities in Hong Kong. Launched the Help Desk for the business community - a one-stop telephone service on environmental standards, legislation and practical guides for reference. Changed the name of the Local Control Division to Environmental
100

Compliance Division (ECD) on 24 July 2004, in recognition of the growing importance of partnerships. The ECD also took over from other divisions the responsibility for enforcing territory-wide issues from other divisions, such as dumping at sea, asbestos control and import and export of waste. 2003 Implemented the Waste Recycling Campaign in Housing Estates (Phase VII), with the participation of 1 333 housing estates. Organised the "Hong Kong Environmental Protection Festival 2003 Forum on SMEs in Environmental Protection Industry" to promote the waste recovery and recycling industries. Launched a trial recovery programme for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) and computers, which resulted in 25 000 units of WEEE, computers and computer peripherals being recovered for reuse or recycling over 12 months. Launched a pilot programme to recycle waste tyres, recycling about 230 tonnes per month for the production of a lightweight geo-construction material to be used as filling material for road sub-base and slopes. Commenced a study on Environmental Impact Assessment and Landuse Rezoning for Development of Recovery Park in Tuen Mun Area 38. Launched a trial "Mooncake Containers Recovery Programme" with support from the trade associations, property management companies, Radio Hong Kong One and the Agency for Volunteer Service, over the two weekends following the Mid-Autumn festival. About 25 000 containers were collected. 2002 Celebrated the Environmental Protection Festival on the themes "Waste Reduction, Clean Air for You and Me, and Protect Our Water Resources". Launched the Waste Recycling Campaign in Housing Estates (Phase VI), with the participation of 1 200 public and private housing estates covering some 1.5 million households, and co-operation with community groups to launch waste recovery schemes. Launched the Waste Separation Scheme for Pre-schools, providing child-size waste separation bins to pre-schools for teaching purposes. Launched a mobile phone battery recycling programme with the mobile phone industry. Co-operated with community groups to launch waste recovery schemes. Invited expressions of interest for the development of waste management and waste treatment facilities.
101

Completed consultations on the control of clinical waste. Invited tenders to build a storage facility for low-level radioactive waste on Siu A Chau. Opened the North West New Territories refuse transfer station. Launched district-based waste recovery campaigns with 12 District Councils. Commenced a plastic bags recovery trial in eight housing estates and 109 convenience stores and supermarkets. Held a Joint Workshop on Waste Management and Contaminated Land, organised with Environment Canada. 2001 Saw the announcement by the Secretary for the Environment and Food of seven major initiatives to enhance the prevention, separation and recycling of domestic waste. Commissioned the North West New Territories Refuse Transfer Station. Commenced construction of a new refuse transfer facility at Ma Wan, as part of the Outlying Islands Transfer Facilities. Held the International Forum on Food Waste Composting, organised with the Hong Kong Baptist University. Launched an on-line electronic application system for environmental permits and licences Formed the Central Prosecution Section within the Local Control Division. 2000 Published EPD's first Environmental Performance Report. Launched the First Hong Kong Green School Award, aimed at encouraging local schools to implement comprehensive green school management. Saw the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the State Environmental Protection Administration and the Environmental Protection Department on hazardous waste import and export control. Commissioned a study to extend the capacities of existing landfills and to search for new waste disposal sites. Saw ISO 14001 Certification of the Waste Facilities Business Unit. Held the International Solid Waste Association's (ISWA) International Symposium and Exhibition on Waste Management in Asia Cities, co-organised by the EPD, ISWA and other parties. 1999 Placed emphasis in the Chief Executive's Policy Address on "Quality People, Quality Home" and sustainable development.
102

Launched the "Hong Kong Eco-Business Awards" to recognise green corporations and the Wastewi$e Scheme to encourage businesses to reduce and avoid waste. Launched the "Waste Recycling Campaign in Housing Estates (Phase III)" to promote recycling of waste paper, aluminium cans and plastic bottles. Established the Waste Reduction Committee and targeted task forces to advise the government on waste reduction measures. Set up a dedicated web-site for public access. Opened the golf driving range at Shuen Wan Landfill in Tai Po, which is the first project to make beneficial use of a restored landfill. Saw successful implementation of the first project to utilise landfill gas by the Hong Kong and China Gas Company. 1998 Adopted "Sustainable Development" as the theme for World Environment Day 1998. Launched the "Waste Recycling Competition in Housing Estates" to promote waste reduction and recycling in public and private estates. Banned the import of hazardous waste from developed countries to tie in with the latest requirement of the Basel Convention. Environmental Assessment & Planning Uploaded Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports exhibited under the EIA Ordinance onto a dedicated Internet home page to facilitate public access. Saw announcement by the Chief Executive's Policy Address that all policy secretaries and directors of bureaux and departments have to provide environmental reports for their organisations starting in 2000. 1997 Produced a promotional video on "Green Families" to encourage public participation in household waste separation and recovery. Implemented the final phase of the Livestock Waste Control Scheme on July 1. 1996 Extended the controls on livestock waste to Tuen Mun, Kam Tin River and part of Yuen Long area. Commissioned a door-to-door livestock waste collection contract to assist farm operators in disposing of livestock waste properly. Introduced a permit control on the import and export of waste under the Waste Disposal Ordinance in accordance with the Basel Convention.
103

1995 Commissioned the North East New Territories (NENT) Landfill, Hong Kong's third strategic landfill. Introduced a charging scheme for the Chemical Waste Treatment Centre (CWTC) to recover the running costs from its users. Opened the Construction Waste Recycling Facility at SENT Landfill. Introduced charges for MARPOL waste at the Chemical Waste Treatment Centre. Implemented the newly localised Dumping at Sea Ordinance. Introduced phased control of livestock farms in the North and Tuen Mun districts under legislation requiring them to meet environmental requirements. Celebrated the first anniversary of the "Use Less Plastic Bags Campaign", which saw 35 million fewer plastic bags used during the year. 1994 Launched the first territory-wide action-oriented waste reduction programme - the year-long "Use Less Plastic Bags Campaign". Amended the Waste Disposal Ordinance to provide comprehensive control of livestock waste, introduce stiffer penalties for illegal dumping of waste and define an offence for breaching waste collection and disposal licence conditions. Commissioned the South East New Territories (SENT) Landfill, Hong Kong's second strategic landfill. Commissioned the Sha Tin Refuse Transfer Station, Hong Kong's third refuse transfer station. Decommissioned the Mui Wo incineration plant. 1993 Commissioned the comprehensive Chemical Waste Treatment Centre - the first in South East Asia, with a capacity to treat 100 000 tonnes of chemical waste per annum, most of which had previously been dumped in the harbour. Phased out the Kennedy Town Incinerator. Commissioned the West New Territories (WENT) Landfill, the first of three strategic landfills in Hong Kong. 1992 Commissioned the Island East Refuse Transfer Station. Enacted regulations under the Waste Disposal Ordinance for the control of chemical wastes.
104

1991 Launched the Marine Dumping Action Plan to strengthen control over marine dumping operations and to deter marine dumping offences. Commissioned the Sha Ling Livestock Waste Composting Plant. 1990 Commissioned Hong Kong's first Refuse Transfer Station (RTS) at Kowloon Bay. Phased out the Lai Chi Kok incinerator and Jordan Valley landfill. Source: Chief Executive (2007) Policy Address; Environmental Protection Department (updated) Milestones in Hong Kong Environmental Protection. Available at http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/resources_pub/history/history_hkep.html (accessed 1.5.2008)

105

Appendix II Hong Kong Universary Public Opinion Programme People's Expectation for the Third Policy Address of Donald Tsang Yam-Kuen

Date of survey : 17 to 21 September 2007 XXX ,? The Chief Executive will soon announce his XXX policy address. Which aspect, do you think, should he regard as the point of focus? Items Economic development Labour and employment Social welfare Education Political development Medical policy Environment Housing Transport Human rights and freedom Civil Education Cultural arts and sports development / Don't know/Hard to say Total First 37.9% 19.6% 7.4% 5.0% 5.1% 5.4% 1.2% 3.4% 0.5% 0.6% 0.8% 0.0% 13.3% 100.0% Second 40.0% 14.6% 9.1% 5.6% 4.9% 4.3% 1.9% 2.3% 0.3% 0.6% 1.2% 0.1% 15.0% 100.0% Second 32.8% 15.4% 13.6% 6.9% 4.9% 4.7% 4.4% 2.0% 1.2% 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% 12.9% 100.0%

(Source: HKU Pop Site, 2007)

106

References
Agamuthu, P. & Hansen, J.A. (2007) Driving waste management towards sustainable development (Preface), Waste Management and Research, 25(3), June, p.193. Boardman, A.E., Greenber, D.H., Vining, A.R., & Weimer, D.L. (1996) Cost-benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice. NJL Prentice Hall. Chapters 1 &2. Bortoleto, A.P., and Hanaki, K. (2007) Report: citizen participation as a part of integrated solid waste management: Porto Alegre case, Waste Management and Research, 25(3), June, pp. 276(7). Bringezu, S. & Vilby, K. (2007) Need to drive the global change. (Guest editorial), Waste Management and Research, 25(3), June, pp.194 (4). Census and Statistics Department (2008) Monthly Digest 2008 March. Chan W.K. (2007) Urban Activism for Effective Governance - A New Civil Society Campaign in the HKSAR, a paper presented at the Conference on First Decade and After: New Voices from Hong Kongs Civil Society organized by Syracuse University in Hong Kong and Roundtable Social Science Society (9 June). Chief Executive (2007) Policy Address by the Chief Executive A New Direction for Hong Kong. Civic Party (undated) Manifesto. Available at http://www.civicparty.hk/cp/pages/page-e/manifasto-e.php?lang=CH 8.7.2008) Clayman, S. & Reisner, A. (1998) Gatekeeping in Action: Editorial Conferences and Assessments of Newsworthiness, American Sociological Review, Vol. 63, No. 2. Council for Sustainable Development. (2004) Final Summary of Discussion on SD Strategy Website Forum Solid Waste Management.
107

(Accessed

Cyranoski, D. (2006) One mans trash, Nature, Nov, Vol.444, pp. 262-263. Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong. (1997) Manifesto. Available at http://www.dab.org.hk/tr/main.jsp?content=category-content.jsp&categoryId=112 3#top (Accessed 8.7.2008)

Democratic Party (undated) DP Platform. http://www.dphk.org/e_site/index_e.htm (accessed 8.7.2008)

Available

at

Department of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, Taipei. (2008) Statistical Yearbook of Taipei City 2007. Available at http://w2.dbas.taipei.gov.tw/News_weekly/abstract/index.htm (accessed 5.5. 2008). Department of Environmental Protection, Taipei. (2005a) Collection of General Waste Clearance and Disposal Fee. Available at http://english.taipei.gov.tw/dep/index.jsp?categid=2841&recordid=2254. (accessed 3.5.2008). Department of Environmental Protection, Taipei. (2005b) Municipal Waste Management. Available at http://english.taipei.gov.tw/dep/index.jsp?categid=2838&recordid=2251. (accessed 3.5.2008). Department of Environmental Protection, Taipei. (2005c) Recycling of Resources. Available at http://english.taipei.gov.tw/dep/index.jsp?categid=2840&recordid=2253 (accessed 3.5.2008). Department of Environmental Protection, Taipei. (2005d) Garbage Cleaning and Transporting and Environment Maintenance. Available at http://english.taipei.gov.tw/dep/index.jsp?categid=2837&recordid=2250 (Accessed 3.5.2008) Department of Statistics, Singapore Government, Taipei. (2007) 2007 Yearbook of
108

Statistics Singapore. Dery, D. (1984) Problem Definition in Policy Analysis. University Press of Kansa. Drackner, M. (2005) What is waste? To whom?--an anthropological perspective on garbage, Waste Management and Research, 23, pp. 175-176. Elmore, R.F. (1987) Instruments and Strategy in Public Policy, Policy Studies Review, 7(1), pp.174-186. Environmental Protection Administration of Executive Yuan, Taiwan. (2006) EPM09-02 February 2006. Available at www.ivy3.epa.gov.tw/englis/EPM/issue0602.doc (Accessed 7.7.2008) Environmental Protection Administration of Executive Yuan, Taiwan. (2007) EPA-95-H101-02-114 . Available at http://epr.epa.gov.tw/query/KO1040000.aspx?DocNo=99977727 (Accessed 27.7.2008) Environmental Protection Administration of Executive Yuan, Taiwan. (2008) Green Mark. Available at http://greenmark.epa.gov.tw/english/index.asp (accessed 7.7.2008) Environmental Protection Department. (2005a) A Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014). Environmental Protection Department. (2005b) Environmental Impact Assessment for Development of an EcoPark in Tuen Mun Area 38. Available at http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia/register/report/eiareport/eia_1042005/executive_summ ary/html/EcoPark%20ExSum%20(Chi%20&%20Eng)%20v7.htm (accessed 10.5.2008) Environmental Protection Department. (2006) How You Can Help Green Procurement. Available at http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/how_help/green_procure/green_procure.html (accessed 7.7.2008)

109

Environmental Protection Department. (2007a) Annual Report 2006 Programme on Source Separstion of Domestic Waste. Environmental Protection Department. (2007b) EcoPark Latest Development. Available at http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/prob_solutions/eco_n ews.html (accessed 10.5.2008) Environmental Protection Department. (2007c) Environmental Performance Report 2007. Environmental Protection Department. (2007d) Monitoring of Solid Waste in Hong Kong Waste Statistics for 2006. Environmental Protection Department. (2007e) Tenders invited for tenancies of second batch of lots in EcoPark Available at https://www.wastereduction.gov.hk/apps/show_eventpost.jsp?eventID=227 (accessed 10.5.2008) Environmental Protection Department. (2007f). Waste Reudction and Recovery Factsheet No.1. Available at https://www.wastereduction.gov.hk/en./assistancewizard/recyc_fact_sheet.htm (accessed 10.5.2008) Environmental Protection Department. (2007g). Public Consultation Report on the Proposal on An Environmental Levy on Plastic Shopping Bags. Environmental Protection Department. (2007h). Assessment of Benefits and Effects of the Plastic Shopping Bag Charging Scheme. (by GHK (Hong Kong) Ltd.). Environmental Protection Department. (2008) Integrated Waste Management Facilities Project Profile. Financial Secretary. (2008) Budget Speech 2008-2009. Finnveden, G.., Bjorklund, A. Moberg, A. & Ekvall, T. (2007) Environmental and economic assessment methods for waste management decision-support: possibilities and limitations, Waste Management and Research, 25(3), June,

110

pp.263(7). Frank, R.H. (2000) Why is Cost-Benefit Analysis so Controversial? In Cost-Benefit Analysis: Legal, Economic, and Philosophical Perspectives, eds. Matthew D. Adler & Eric A. Posner, 77-94. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Friends of the Earth (HK) (2008) Producer Responsibility. Available at http://www.foe.org.hk/welcome/geten.asp?language=en&id_path=1,%207,%2026 ,%203008,%203009 (accessed 12.5.2008) Government Information Office, Taiwan. (2004) Taiwan Yearbook 2004. Available at http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website/5-gp/yearbook/2004/P199.htm Green Council. (2007) Hong Kong Green Label Scheme. Available at http://www.greencouncil.org/eng/greenlabel/intro.asp (accessed 10.7.2008) Howlett, M. & Ramesh, M. (2003) Globalization and the Choice of Governing Instruments: the Direct, Indirect, and Opportunity Effects of Internationalization, International Public Management Journal, 9(2), pp. 175-194. Hong Kong SAR Government. (2007) Hong Kong Yearbook 2006. Jin, J.J., Wang, Z.S. & Ran, S.H. (2006) Estimating the public preferences for solid waste management programmes using choice experiments in Macao, Waste Management and Research, 24(4), August, pp. 301(9). Kingdon, J.W. (1995) Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, New York: HarperCollins College Publishers. Liberal Party. (2003) Liberal Party Manifesto. http://www.liberal.org.hk/contents/ (Accessed 8.7.2008) Available at

Lin, M.D., Wang, C.C., and Lin, C.F. (2006) Evaluation of Solid Waste Management Strategies in the Taipei Metropolitan Area of Taiwan, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, May, pp. 56(5). Matthews, E. (2000) The Weight of Nations Material Outflows from Industrial
111

Economies, pp. xi-32. World Resources Institute. Washington, DC.

McCombs, M. & Shaw, D. (1972) The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media, The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2. McCombs, M., Shaw, D., & Weaver, D. (1998) Communication and Democracy: Exploring the Intellectual Frontiers in Agenda-Setting Theory, The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 62, No. 1. Meyers, G.D., McLeod, G., and Anbarci, M.A. (2006) An international waste convention: measures for achieving sustainable development, Waste Management and Research, 24(6), Dec, pp.505(9). Ministry of the Environmental and Water Resources, Singapore. (2008a) Clean Land. Available at http://app.mewr.gov.sg/web/Contents/Contents.aspx?ContId=26 (accessed 11.7.2008) Ministry of the Environmental and Water Resources, Singapore. (2008b) The Singapore Green Plan 2012. Available at http://www.mewr.gov.sg/sgp2012/about.htm (accessed 8.7.2008) National Environmental Agency, Singapore. (2007a) Appendix 2 Refuse Disposal Figures. Available at http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=401 (accessed 19.12.2007) National Environmental Agency, Singapore. (2007a) Environmental Protection Division 2006 Annual Report. National Environmental Agency, Singapore. (2007b) The Need for Waste Minimization. Available at http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=1459 (accessed 6.12.2007) National Environmental Agency, Singapore. (2007c) Sarimbun Recycling Park Wasteland Returns to Useful Life. Available at http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=982 (accessed 6.12.2007) National Environmental Agency, Singapore. (2008) Bring Your Own Bag Day
112

(BYOBD). Available at http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=2859 (accessed 9.7.2008) Nicol, S. and Thompson, S. (2007) Policy options to reduce consumer waste to zero: comparing product stewardship and extended producer responsibility for refrigerator waste, Waste Management and Research, 25(3), June, pp. 227(7). Nie, Y.F., Li, T.W., Yan, G., Wang, Y.Y. & Ma, X.F. (2004) An Optimal Model and Its Application for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste from Regional Small Cities in China, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, Feb, 54, pp. 191-199. Panel on Environmental Affairs, Legislative Council (2007) Waste Disposal (Designated Waste Disposal Facility) (Amendment) Regulation 2004 and Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation Progress Report on Construction Waste Disposal Charging Scheme. For Discussion on 26 March 2007. Panel on Environmental Affairs, Legislative Council (2008a) Site Selection for the Development of the Integrated Waste Management Facilities. LC Paper No. CB(1) 724/07-08(01). Panel on Environmental Affairs, Legislative Council (2008b) Updating background brief on management of municipal solid waste in Hong Kong prepared by Legislative Council Secretariat. LC Paper No. CB(1) 844/0708(04). Panel on Environmental Affairs, Legislative Council (2008c) Update on the Progress of the Key Initiatives in the Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014). LC Paper No. CB(1) 844/0708(03). Panel on Environmental Affairs, Legislative Council. (undated) Terms of Reference. Available at http://www.legco.gov.hk/english/index.htm. (accessed on 3.5.2008). Poulsen, S.B. (2007) Report: examples of capacity building cooperation, Waste Management and Research, 25(3), June, pp. 283(5). Productivity Commission, Australia. (2006) Waste Management Inquiry Report.
113

Salamon, L.M. (2002) The Tools of Government. NY: Oxford University Press. Chapter 1. The Straits Times. (2003) Business booming at recycling park (dated 18.8.2003). Singapore Environment Council. (updated) Green Label. Available at http://www.sec.org.sg/greenlabel_htm/greenlable_frameset.htm (accessed 7.7.2008) Stone, D. A. (1997) Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. W.W. Norton & Company. New York. London. Tan, R.B.H. & Khoo, H.H. (2006) Impact Assessment of Waste Management Options in Singapore, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, Mar, 56, pp. 244-254. Taipei Healthy City. (2003) Taipei Healthy City Project. Available at http://healthycity.taipei.gov.tw/admin/upload/cityprofile/2005004.pdf (accessed 8.7.2008) Tullock, G. (1974) Does Punishment Deter Crime? Public Interest, vol.14: 103-111. Tyler, T. (1990) Chapters 1&3. In Why People Obey the Law. New Heaven: Yale University Press. Wilson, D.C. (2007) Development drivers for waste management, Waste Management and Research, 25(3), June, pp. 198(10). Mingpao Daily (2008): Environmental Protection Departments statistics on waste disposal is misleading (dated 8.7) ( : 0.3% 0.6%(2008 7 8 ))

114